I design around this, but would love to check it out when/if super alpha. On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 6:49 AM, Chris Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I want to see this too =) With the latest proxy object support and lazy > loading, I have been using an array of transfer objects in a few places, > which I would love to gut and replace with something like your TIBO > (Transfer Iterating Business Object, lets spread the word, thats the new > acronym). If you need a tester let me know =) > > Chris Peterson > On Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 6:20 AM, Peter Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >> Im certainly interested in seeing how this progresses :-) >> >> Peter >> >> On Dec 5, 2008, at 1:05 AM, Adam wrote: >> >> > >> > I am trying to create an IteratingTransferObject, or >> > AbastractIteratingObject, or IteratingBusinessObject (IBO) as >> > described by Mr. Peter Bell... >> > >> > I need something to kill the OIP evil do-er with transfer objects from >> > large tables that _need_ the concrete, mixin, and abstract code to >> > perform accordingly... (validation/documentation/business objects, ui, >> > ajax calls, mvc plugins, services, gateways..) I was never never able >> > to find, or didn't look in the right places for a solid example of the >> > pattern in use with transfer. >> > >> > I think it's a great idea, so I did a quick and dirty test in my >> > model .. this dirty test gave my ui an unscientifically estimation of >> > 80%!! reduction in load times on large record sets, as compared to >> > when i just use very large transfer object collections. >> > >> > In my proof of concept I immediately ran into a few things right of >> > the bat that would require some rethinking and refactoring.. But.... >> > I don't want to run off into the desert with no water if there is >> > another route... >> > >> > My ITO is a factory generated, beanInjected, wrapper on a new transfer >> > object that is being populated() by my Abstract Decorator and looped >> > over a cached query,. so when i get one of these 'transferObjects' >> > it's not exactly being created by Transfer, and I found that i was >> > getting a PK = 0 and isPersisted = false and isDirty=true..... >> > >> > I quickly hacked my wrapper to get the PK from the instance.recordset, >> > insted of the TO just to make it work.... but I cant move any further >> > with this until i get my head around the Performance / Development/ >> > Cost involved... or at least make me feel comfortable that it's going >> > to work until adobe _hopefully_ fixes the OIP in CF9???.. >> > >> > I'm just looking for any feedback from anyone with any interest in my >> > topic.. >> > >> > Thanks Guys! >> > > >> >> >> >> > > > -- > Hey! I dont tell you how to tell me what to do, so dont tell me how to do > what you tell me to do! ~ Bender (Futurama) > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Before posting questions to the group please read: http://groups.google.com/group/transfer-dev/web/how-to-ask-support-questions-on-transfer You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "transfer-dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/transfer-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
