On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 09:19:06PM +0200, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 8:59 PM, Matt S Trout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 09:54:44AM +0200, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:
> >> Hi Matt,
> >>
> >> I would like to include your critisizm of the support for many to many
> >> in RecursiveUpdate in it's documentation. Tell me if I get it right.
> >> What I remember is two points:
> >>
> >> 1. That I rely on the fact that
> >>
> >> if($object->can($name) and
> >> !$object->result_source->has_relationship($name) and
> >> $object->can( 'set_' . $name )
> >> )
> >>
> >> then $name must be a many to many pseudo relation. And that in a
> >> similarly ugly was I find out what is the ResultSource of objects from
> >> that many to many pseudo relation.
> >>
> >> 2. That I treat uniformly relations and many to many (which are
> >> different from relations because they require traversal of the bridge
> >> table).
> >>
> >> Is that right?
> >
> > Precisely, which means your code is fragile and implicitly broken.
> >
>
> Just to focus the discussion - you are referring here to 1) or 2)?
Both.
--
Matt S Trout Need help with your Catalyst or DBIx::Class project?
Technical Director http://www.shadowcat.co.uk/catalyst/
Shadowcat Systems Ltd. Want a managed development or deployment platform?
http://chainsawblues.vox.com/ http://www.shadowcat.co.uk/servers/
_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/
Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
