Chris Withers wrote:
>
> Bill Anderson wrote:
> > What happens when the object is in multiple racks?
> > (Assuming it is possible)
>
> Then it'll be missing if something tries to get it from a rack. The same
> thing as would happen if something tried to get it from a single rack
> after it'd bee
Scott Parish wrote:
> Another thought i just had was that if you deleted by placing a call to the
> Rack, then you couldn't allow the class to override manage_delete. You might
> want to do such (overriding) if you wanted it to clean up a catalog or perform
> some other auxiliary function before
Bill Anderson wrote:
> What happens when the object is in multiple racks?
> (Assuming it is possible)
Then it'll be missing if something tries to get it from a rack. The same
thing as would happen if something tried to get it from a single rack
after it'd been deleted. So this case should be cove
Thus spake Chris Withers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Scott Parish wrote:
> > I'm not entirely clear how
> > asking the object to delete itself in this case is going to improve the
> > situation over just asking the rack to, but I think that was the intent.
>
> Okay, I see the intent now too, but I ag
Chris Withers wrote:
>
> Scott Parish wrote:
> > I'm not entirely clear how
> > asking the object to delete itself in this case is going to improve the
> > situation over just asking the rack to, but I think that was the intent.
>
> Okay, I see the intent now too, but I agree with you that I can
Scott Parish wrote:
> I'm not entirely clear how
> asking the object to delete itself in this case is going to improve the
> situation over just asking the rack to, but I think that was the intent.
Okay, I see the intent now too, but I agree with you that I can't see
what advantage asking the obj
Thus spake Chris Withers ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Ty Sarna wrote:
> > call the manage_delete() method on the object. That is, you ask the
> > object to delete itself.
>
> This seems unnecessarily long-winded to me. What are the reasons for it
> being like this? (examples are good... ;-)
>
> > How
Ty Sarna wrote:
> call the manage_delete() method on the object. That is, you ask the
> object to delete itself.
This seems unnecessarily long-winded to me. What are the reasons for it
being like this? (examples are good... ;-)
> However, once you have the object, operations on the object should
In article ,
Jeff Hoffman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> However, search as I might, I cannot figure out how to delete an item
> once it's been created. On gut instinct, I figured there would be a
> deleteItem() to complement the newItem() method. No
Ok, I have a stupid question.
I have succeeded in creating a ZClass (a subclass of DataSkin) and
instantiating a few instances in the defaultRack of my Specialist using
my Specialist's newItem() method. Rock.
However, search as I might, I cannot figure out how to delete an item
once it's been cr
10 matches
Mail list logo