Just Launched: You can now import projects and releases from Google Code onto SourceForge
We are excited to release new functionality to enable a 1-click import from Google Code onto the Allura platform on SourceForge. You can import tickets, wikis, source, releases, and more with a few simple steps. Read More
Update of /cvsroot/webware/Webware/MiddleKit/Docs
In directory usw-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv13819
axed some finished items. added 2 new issues
RCS file: /cvsroot/webware/Webware/MiddleKit/Docs/TODO-MiddleKit.text,v
retrieving revision 1.28
retrieving revision 1.29
diff -C2 -d -r1.28 -r1.29
*** TODO-MiddleKit.text 2001/10/19 19:52:41 1.28
--- TODO-MiddleKit.text 2002/01/08 02:11:47 1.29
*** 61,85 ****
- [ ] deleting objects
- Suppose Foo points to Bar. Given that Foo gets deleted, what happens with relation to Bar?
- - detach (Bar stays around and it's back reference to Foo is set to None)
- - cascade (delete foo)
- - deny
- - dangle (very dangerous)
- Use UML terminology if such a thing exists.
- [ ] MK derived attributes
- - can get by, by declaring a *real* attribute and then
- just overriding the get method. Cheesy, but it works.
- - isDerived
- - allAttrs(..., isDerived=None)
- None - get all attrs, otherwise non-derived or derived
- - fix SQL code gen in Design/
- - fix SQL code gen in Run/
- - test MK browser
- - run test suites
- - update applications and run app test suites
- - document
[ ] Distinct lists: An object such as "Video" cannot have a directors and writers attribute that are both typed "list of Person". Might want to review UML relationships before calling the deal on this.
--- 61,64 ----
*** 118,121 ****
--- 97,118 ----
+ [ ] A subtle issue with deleting objects requires a saveChanges() repeated times. I inquired with Geoff T who wrote:
+ This is tricky. I think what happens is that store.deleteObject() ends up
+ calling store.fetchObjectsOfClass() somewhere a few levels deep inside of its
+ reference-checking code. That method always reloads the fields from SQL,
+ wiping out local changes (I think).
+ If there were a flag to fetchObjectsOfClass() that could say "but if the
+ objects are already in memory, don't reload their values from SQL" that would
+ help. In fact, maybe that should be the standard behavior? The problem is,
+ what do you do with SQL clauses passed in to fetchObjectsOfClass()? You
+ can't exactly apply them to objects in memory without writing a SQL parser in
+ Also see the comment in MiddleObject.referencingObjectsAndAttrs().
+ [ ] fetchObject*() refreshes the attributes of the objects in question, even if they were modified. eg, you could lose your changes
[ ] "set" methods for strings don't raise an exception when the min or max length boundaries are violated.