How hard can automatic save be?
But how would immutable DAOs work? There was a thread, I think on scala-user, a 
long time ago discussing it, that pretty much concluded it would be very 
problematic. David weighed in and said after a long time he concluded that 
databases represent state.


-------------------------------------
Timothy Perrett<timo...@getintheloop.eu> wrote:


Right, no one likes mutable anything :-)

I kinda wondered why you haven't pushed forward any more with the  
current record implementation... can one assume that is why - because  
it didn't feel right?

Some of this stuff is going to be fundamental to how we move forward -  
id love to perhaps discuss something that would be better than what we  
have already. Even if its just pie in the sky talk...

Cheers, Tim

On 22 Oct 2009, at 17:22, David Pollak wrote:

> I don't like mutable fields.  I don't like manual saving.  Dunno...  
> it's hard to articulate... it just feels wrong in my tummy.  Also, I  
> want to be clear that I think Marius did a great job of cleaning up  
> some of the problems with Mapper when he did Record... my comments  
> are not a negative to him... there's just something unsatisfying  
> about the whole approach.
>
> Bet that was less than helpful.




--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to liftweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to