Rob van Maris wrote:
<Michiel Meeuwissen:>

I think it is not worth trying to fix it. It should be clear that 'inheritance' is a new experimental feaure in 1.6, which needs the new 'storage' implementation (of wich a version for some databases is shipped in 1.6).


That's acceptable.

Still the original database support classes have seen a number of
modifications related to "inheritance". Obviously some aspects of
inheritance have been implemented here while others have not, and what
we end up with is a blurry picture of partly implemented stuff.

That's correct,I think it was because there was a lot of confusion about the status of the Storageclasses.


Looks like it was intended to implement inheritance with the original
database support classes, but the work got stranded halfway.


I think this proves my point that implementing inheritance, started as a
hack, should instead have been a project all along.

Are there issues to be resolved in this area, beside a proper database implementation?


Gerard




Reply via email to