On Tuesday, April 22, 2014 9:18:31 PM UTC-5, Jeremy Evans wrote: > > What problem are you actually trying to solve? Your post discusses > band-aids for symptoms, but not the problem itself. :) >
You are absolutely right. I think that the problem that I am trying to solve is a design problem. Basically, I keep trying to minimize the amount of work that I have to or any other developer using my system has to do in order to make entities stored in a tree behave like regular old variables containing plain old object instances in memory. But they're really not that at all, no -- they're just database row entries fetched and stored in hashes. The system I am trying to construct is partly adapted from another older system which dealt with its entire program running in main memory only, without any persistence whatsoever. Of course, I am also attempting to preserve the idioms of the original programmatic system. So now there is an impedance mismatch. I guess what I really need to do is just override the Base#== and the Base#eql? methods in the model subclass to only compare the primary key. Thanks again, -Nels -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sequel-talk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sequel-talk. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
