On Dec 24, 2007, at 1:04 PM, Adrian Klaver wrote:
> The difference is the use of __storm_table__ to indicate the
> underlying table
> in Storm versus self.DataSource in Dabo. In only becomes an issue
> when you
> are parsing the api docs and trying to figure out what source
> refers to. In
> the case of save() or requery() it is the underlying table, in the
> case of
> update() it is the bizobj.
No, that is simply wrong. You are mixing the UI DataSource with the
bizobj DataSource. Bizobjs do not have update(); that is for data-
bound UI controls. Likewise, UI controls don't have save() or requery().
UI elements that deal with data are bound to the bizobj. The bizobj
is bound (via its cursors) to the database table. What you've been
suggesting sounds like a 2-tier approach: binding the UI directly to
the database, so that calling update() on the UI control fetches data
from the backend.
I get the feeling that you're trying to compress everything into a
single tier. While that certainly would make for a simple system, it
would also make for an inflexible system. The 3-tier design strictly
separates UI from the data, unlike other designs such as MVC. The UI
doesn't ever "know" where the data it is displaying comes from; all
it knows is that update() fetches the data and flush() sends it back.
-- Ed Leafe
-- http://leafe.com
-- http://dabodev.com
_______________________________________________
Post Messages to: [email protected]
Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users
Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users
This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/dabo-users/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
