protected 2009/3/30 Enrique Ramirez <[email protected]>
> > On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Well... remove lazy-loading is not a solution. > > After putting some thought into it, this class will be a foreign key > to the "workhorse" class. So you do have a point in that removing lazy > load is not a good solution in the long run. The reason why I didn't > want the setter method to be virtual was because it calculates values > for other private fields, and I was calling it in one of the class > constructors. I guess I could make a helper method to provide this > functionality and be able to place it in both the constructor and the > virtual setter. > > Unless I'm missing something I think that's my only option. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Enrique Ramirez Irizarry > Lead Developer, CodaBytes Consulting Group > http://www.Codabytes.com > Personal Page: http://www.indiecodelabs.com > > > > -- Fabio Maulo --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
