Teoman Haliloglu wrote: > Good idea... I don't have an idea how much overhead keeping uncompiled code > in the database and running it with indirection will bring though. > Negligible?
The code is a single methodname or tag^routine. That's negligible. You don't even need think about it again. > accidental manipulation of data would cause serious problems. That's almost universally true. :) > As you stated and proposed this solution is keeping some "classes" > (which are different approval types) in the database (codes and/or > approval type hierarchy) instead of compiling all of the approval > types as independent classes. I couldn't imagine doing the latter. > the application built might be more vulnarable to data accidents... I don't see how. > I'll need to create exactly the same data if I want to reuse the code on > another sytem. That is untrue. Actually, your design with hardcoded ApprovalTypes suffers from this problem. Mine, by storing the ApprovalType NextStep method with the ApprovalType itself, does not have this problem.
