Hi Ken > Why do you think that? What aspect of your design leads you to that > conclusion?
I have a one-to-many relationship between two classes but, with a slight twist... MasterObject 1..n DerivedDetailObject DerivedDetailObject inherits from BaseDetailObject BaseDetailObject n..1 MasterObject So, it is a two-way relationship, split by inheritance on the detail side :-) > Normally, an outlet would be something that the class inherently uses (or > would use if connected). Since NSArrayController has no already existing > need for the outlet you're adding, and doesn't know to use it if it's present > and connected, it doesn't make sense to create a subclass solely for the > purpose of adding it. The need for subclassing an array controller is to override the addObject: method to set the "master" property on each object that gets added to the "detail" list. > You don't bind an outlet, you merely connect it. And you connect it to an > object, not a property of an object. Your choice of terminology makes me > wonder if what you really want to do is create a new binding, which is a > different kind of thing from an outlet. Yup, I do realise there is a difference between outlets and bindings. It's just that I haven't yet discovered how to declare the two sides of a binding, that can be completed in IB. Unless, of course, there is another way to circumvent the problem of resolving the "split" relationship. Joanna -- Joanna Carter Carter Consulting_______________________________________________ Cocoa-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list. Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
