Yeah... I'm curious about the use case as well! ;o) What's the reason?
Mark
On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 5:57 AM, Chris Peterson wrote:
> Is there a reason that you did not just get a list rather than using
> objects to begin with, or just write plain jane SQL statements to get what
> you need? Raw
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:39 PM, Cameron Childress wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Bob Silverberg
> wrote:
> > Thanks for the info, Cameron. Looking at your example, it looks a bit
> like
> > s1 and s2 are actually lookup tables, but your original description is
> not
> > in line with
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Bob Silverberg wrote:
> Thanks for the info, Cameron. Looking at your example, it looks a bit like
> s1 and s2 are actually lookup tables, but your original description is not
> in line with that, so I think I must be reading something into the model
> that isn't
Thanks for the info, Cameron. Looking at your example, it looks a bit like
s1 and s2 are actually lookup tables, but your original description is not
in line with that, so I think I must be reading something into the model
that isn't there. The record in s1, which is being joined to T1, is it a
s
Is there a reason that you did not just get a list rather than using objects
to begin with, or just write plain jane SQL statements to get what you need?
Raw SQL is still one of the fastest ways to get data from the database,
objects and tql are really (imo) when you want your rich business object
I am sure this must have been discussed already, but a search did not yield
any results.
I was looking for a UDF to convert an array of transfer objects to a query.
I was looking at http://cflib.org/udf/arrayOfObjectsToQuery which uses the
CF getMetaData() function and is looking for getter functio
To clarify, the table I tried to cleverly rename as table1 with an
alias of T1, was initially aliased sm in my code, not T1. Sorry if my
invalid pseudocode is confusing.
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Cameron Childress wrote:
> SELECT sm.prop1,
> sm.prop2,
> sm.p
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 3:07 PM, Bob Silverberg wrote:
> This is an interesting discussion. I was wondering, Cameron, if you'd be
> willing to share an example from your application so that we could see
> whether or not there's an elegant way to make Transfer fit with your model.
Sure. This is a
This is an interesting discussion. I was wondering, Cameron, if you'd be
willing to share an example from your application so that we could see
whether or not there's an elegant way to make Transfer fit with your model.
It does sound like the answer will be no, but it might be an interesting
discu
Doug-
I have the same thoughts as far as benefits of using Transfer, even if
I am just rolling all the data up into bigger non-transfer DTOs, but
at a certain point all that extra work I'm doing around Transfer is
defeating the purpose of having an ORM framework in the first place.
I'm not sayin
On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 2:44 PM, Josh Nathanson wrote:
> I would say that yes, your statement is confirmed.
Okay
> I also might add that having DTO's that are not 1 to 1, might indicate a
> less than optimal application model, that is doing one to one joins rather
> than compositing objects.
Re
I would say that yes, your statement is confirmed.
I also might add that having DTO's that are not 1 to 1, might indicate a
less than optimal application model, that is doing one to one joins rather
than compositing objects.
For example, consider a car object that "has an" engine object. You ar
So, I've been toying with Transfer off and on since CF.Objective, but
I think I've come to a end of my exploration. I wanted to ping the
like and make sure I'm not missing a solution here.
I have an existing application I'm refactoring using ColdSpring and
wanted to use Transfer too. However - m
Cameron, I tend to develop the way you're describing as well, but here's how
I figure Transfer into the mix...
Okay, any service object is typically going to be a composite of underlying,
simpler objects that DO have a 1 to 1 relationship to the db. For instance,
if you are writing a "smart" userSe
14 matches
Mail list logo
