@Jon,

You don't have to, but personally I take the position that an IBO is a  
collection of 0..* objects and that a single business object is simply  
a collection where n=1. The key for me is that if I have a custom  
getter like User.getAge(), I might want to display the age of either a  
single user or of a list of users and I don't want to repeat myself,  
so the same code needs to be available for both a single business  
object or a collection of them. My simple work around is just to use  
business objects that extend a BaseIBO for both my single instances  
and my collections. I wouldn't say it is incredibly elegant  
conceptually, but I haven't come across and practical problems working  
this way in over 80 projects - they are clean, quick to build and easy  
to maintain - even with lots of client back and forth, so it's working  
for me.

Best Wishes,
Peter


On Sep 29, 2008, at 4:51 PM, Jon wrote:

> I am also in the exact same boat as John is when it comes to OO and  
> DB layout.
>
> I like the idea of an IBO to house my 1...* relationships, but would  
> you use the IBO in place of a bean for single instances?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jon
>
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Brian Kotek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  
> wrote:
> You can also look at something like Transfer, which manages these  
> kinds of relationships for you and caches the CFC instances to  
> mostly remove the performance hit caused by creating lots of  
> instances on each request.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2008 at 6:51 AM, John Whish  
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Coming from a database orientated background I've always thought of  
> relationships between two objects in the same way. If I have a  
> company object and an employee object then the employee object would  
> hold a reference to the company object. Recently I wanted to get a  
> list of employees for the company and it got me thinking that  
> instead of looking up to the database, maybe I should be holding an  
> array of employees in the company object. This has some advantages,  
> but seems like a bad idea. Has anyone actually done it like this?
>
> Thanks in advance :-)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"CFCDev" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/cfcdev?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to