> > Spring interfaces with JDO via the PersistenceManager. I think the idea > > is that there is one central access point into JDO through the > > PersistenceManager. Maxim has created some code that implements > > PersistenceManager like functions for Torque. Hopefully this will let us > > mirror the JDO design for the torque ORM package. Spring tries to be > > consistent in implementation and I think Thomas Risberg would approve of > > that design. > > Hm, if you would ask me for the most central place to interface with > Torque I would use the generated Peer classes. I would not use BasePeer > for it, because BasePeer cannot handle specific objects (for example, > BasePeer does not know how to create a Book Object from a row of the BOOK
> table in the database, only BookPeer knows how to do that). What makes > Torque different from most other Object-Relational managers is that Torque > uses very little reflection, but rather relies on generated classes, so > there is no "central" class. If one insists that there should be _ONE_ > central class to access the database, this smells like trouble, I do not > think Torque would fit very well into this approach. Probably one would > do best to generate that central class as well. But this is just > guesswork, there is a good probablility that I am wrong. > I think acccessing the generated Peer class is what Maxim's implementation of the PersistenceManager can do. Maxim is this correct? -jm --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
