[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: RFC: GDL2 differences to EOF / WO4.5.1

From: Manuel Guesdon
Subject: Re: RFC: GDL2 differences to EOF / WO4.5.1
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 19:27:14 +0100 (CET)

Hi David,

On Wed, 12 Mar 2003 18:23:18 +0100 David Ayers <address@hidden> wrote:

 >| Hello Manuel,
 >| I'm coming up with oddities of EOF 3.0 of WO4.5.1 and subtle differences 
 >| to GDL2 here and there:
 >| - EONull compareAscending: nil returns NSOrderedAscending instead of 
 >| NSOrderedSame

I have no specific preference. 

 >| - EOModel does not implement isEqual:

And WO4.5 does ? So we'll  to implement it...

 >| And I haven't gotten far enough into .gswd/.wod-parsing to analyse the 
 >| GDL2 feature of NSDictionary valueForKeyPath and quoted key names.  I 
 >| would like to propose the following default: 
 >| GSUseStrictWO451Compatiblity or GSUseStrictEOF451Compatiblity or 
 >| GSUseStrictEOF30?Compatiblity or what ever better name someone comes up 
 >| with.

I don't like too much this kind of things because if you use 2 frameworks or 
libraries which set a different behaviour, the result is unknown and may 
depend on some calling order.
I still don't see real problem with quoted key names but if you want to make 
a parameter to control this, I'm OK :-)

 >| Along with that comes a function (probably in EONSAndOns (and utility 
 >| class for thread safe access to global locks for GDL2))
 >| BOOL
 >| GSUseStrictWO451Compatiblity(NSString *key)
 >| which caches the result from the default evaluation.  I'm not intending 
 >| to update the cache.  What ever the default is when it's read, that will 
 >| determine the behaviour of that process.
 >| When set to YES, it would:
 >| - ignore the special handling of quoted keys in GDL2 KVC

 >| - evaluate [[EONull null] compareAscending: nil] to NSOrderedAscending 
 >| (instead of NSOrderedSame as we do now.)

For this one, we could act as WO4.5 anyway.

 >| - have [EOModel isEqual:] call super instead of a sane isEqual: 
 >| implementation, that I would like to have a look at later.

For this one, WO4.5 implementation should be OK, shouldn't it ?

Manuel Guesdon - OXYMIUM <address@hidden>
14 rue Jean-Baptiste Clement  -  93200 Saint-Denis  -  France
Tel: +33 1 4940 0999  -  Fax: +33 1 4940 0998

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]