The confusing thing, in this exchange is why Lachlan would be concerned about an object which, on the face of it, should never have been constructed (since it was created and then deleted, before it was ever persisted), or why he would want to create objects to replace those that had been deleted.
>From the program's point of view, it's clear that TRANSIENT can be treated >exactly the same as DELETED, since they both mean that some persistable object >previously created in the program has subsequently been deleted by the >program. From the database's point of view, the states can't be treated the >same way; the DELETED object has to be deleted from the database, the >TRANSIENT object was never in the database and can be ignored. Tony NOTICE - This message and any attached files may contain information that is confidential, legally privileged or proprietary. It is intended only for use by the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error. Any dissemination, copying, use or re-transmission of this message or attachment, or the disclosure of any information therein, is strictly forbidden. BlueScope Steel Limited does not represent or guarantee that this message or attachment is free of errors, virus or interference. If you have received this message in error please notify the sender immediately and delete the message. Any views expressed in this email are not necessarily the views of BlueScope Steel Limited.
