On Sat, Sep 3, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Andrus Adamchik <and...@objectstyle.org> wrote: > Anyways, my suggestion would be to keep 'localObject' name for now. It is not > ideal but good enough IMO.
Well, every co-worker I've ever told about localObject() found the name confusing to them, which is why I was encouraging a new name. We actually use localObject() a decent amount because we pull a master object into a new DataContext for editing purposes. It gives us the ability to abandon any changes easily if needed. So, I've been through this explanation a few times now. :-) Thanks, mrg
