Of course it does. :P Too bad I didn't know that before I hastily changed the value.
I don't have a custom EC class...I just use ERXEC. However, that's a good idea (as always). Thanks, -Lon On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 3:00 PM, Chuck Hill <[email protected]>wrote: > IIRC, the undo stack has a hand in processing deletions. You can only have > this at zero if you never delete anything. I do this in my EC instead: > > /** > * Overridden to clear undo stack after a successful save. > */ > public void saveChanges() > { > super.saveChanges(); > if (undoManager() != null) > { > undoManager().removeAllActions(); > } > } > > > > > Chuck > > > > On Nov 18, 2009, at 12:52 PM, Lon Varscsak wrote: > > Holy crap, I found my problem...but I don't understand why. I was setting >> WODefaultUndoStackLimit=0 (trying to turn off undos) and apparently >> something in EOF and/or Wonder isn't happy with that. >> >> -Lon >> >> On Wed, Nov 18, 2009 at 1:18 PM, Lon Varscsak <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> I'm having a problem where I'm removing an object from a to-many >> relationship (that owns destination) and the objects are remaining in the >> editing context after processRecentChanges() is called (or >> saveChanges())...which then results in an exception being thrown because I >> have objects that are orphaned and don't have a required relationship set >> (since it was cleared in the "remove" operation). >> >> I swear this is something new...because I tested this a few weeks ago, and >> I fear it's caused by updating my version of Wonder....but I can't figure >> out why or where it's all going wrong. >> >> Disclosures: >> >> * I am deleting an object that was also inserted into the same editing >> context...both not in the database (so temporary gids) >> * The editing context in question is a child editing context for another, >> but I don't think that's the issue, because I can get it to happen without >> this setup. >> * Using Wonder from 11/16/2009 (previous version unknown...sometime in Oct >> probably) >> * WO 5.4.3 >> * I'm using Wonder with updateInverseRelationships=true (although I can >> get it to fail with =false) ...and the relationship on both sides is >> correct, it's just that it didn't remove the object from the insertedObjects >> array >> >> Thanks, >> >> Lon >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. >> Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) >> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: >> >> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/chill%40global-village.net >> >> This email sent to [email protected] >> > > -- > Chuck Hill Senior Consultant / VP Development > > Practical WebObjects - for developers who want to increase their overall > knowledge of WebObjects or who are trying to solve specific problems. > http://www.global-village.net/products/practical_webobjects > > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected]) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to [email protected]
