Thanks Tim,

I can readily see that I’d have been well advised to use an interim entity like 
“Document” or something.

sigh.

I’m guessing it’s not a good idea to try and make the ERAttachment a subclass 
or EO of my own.

maybe I should use the takeStoredValueForKey, check if the key is a change in 
the poster relationship and then fire the script?

that might preserve the model, while firing the script only when the save is a 
change on the relationship?



On Aug 2, 2013, at 2:41 PM, Timothy Worman <[email protected]> wrote:

> Your override would not be called if the updating process is using 
> takeStoredValueForKey.
> 
> Tim
> UCLA GSE&IS
> 
> On Aug 2, 2013, at 10:21 AM, Jesse Tayler <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> I have an override of a normal EO setter, but for some reason, it isn’t 
>> called but the value does get updated
>> 
>> I really just want to fire off a unix process once a new posterId has been 
>> set, so maybe there’s a smarter way but I thought this would be reliably 
>> called once and only after there’s a known primary key id for that poster 
>> (ERAttachment)
>> 
>> Any thoughts on that?
>> 
>> 
>>   @Override
>>   public void setPosterId(Integer value) {
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/lists%40thetimmy.com
>> 
>> This email sent to [email protected]

 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to [email protected]

Reply via email to