Thanks Steve and Alek. As I mentioned wrappers delegating access to a containing class and simple copy to from a business class is what we do today and its a mess, its error prone and its totally manual, am I missing something? Every new attribute needs to either have a few lines more added to the business class to get and set its values. In a prior job I did use a system where persisted classes were generated as *Base classes where you were expected to implement the * extending *Base. This worked very well and reduced maintainability. I can of course imagine that for languages that are not OO it would prove to be a challenge (yes I dont use Python).
Thanks C On Jan 17, 12:20 am, Alek Storm <alek.st...@gmail.com> wrote: > I agree with Shane. Wrapping the data is a great way to separate the > business logic from the data. Actually, if you're using Python, > you're not allowed to subclass generated message types (though there's > no 'sealed' modifier) - it screws with the metaclass machinery. > > Cheers, > Alek --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Protocol Buffers" group. To post to this group, send email to protobuf@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to protobuf+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/protobuf?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
