True, forgot that Cake uses Set a lot. On Jul 6, 10:06 am, mark_story <mark.st...@gmail.com> wrote: > ArrayAccess and real arrays are very different things, so this won't > work. Try using Set on an object graph that implements ArrayAccess. > It will go pretty poorly. If it were that simple it would have been > done by now. > > -Mark > > On Jul 5, 4:24 pm, Miles J <mileswjohn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Couldn't we just have the DB call return a "QueryResponse" object that > > maps all the values together and associated models (also as > > QueryResponse objects). Then give it ArrayAccess functionality for > > backwards compatibility? > > > (I haven't thought much into it, just throwing it out there.) > > > On Jul 5, 11:06 am, stephenrs <ssgro...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Thanks for your reply, Mark. I'd just chime in by agreeing that it is hard > > > to build an ORM...but since this wheel has already been invented..and > > > reinvented, it's hard to justify why a new ORM would need to be built for > > > Cake. There are already several mature PHP-based ORM systems (Doctrine and > > > Propel leading the pack) that are ripe for straightforward integration > > > into > > > larger systems. > > > > So, rather than a backwards-compatibility-killing overhaul of Cake's model > > > system, perhaps a better approach would be to start by offering Cake > > > developers a choice by allowing the data access layer to be toggled > > > between > > > returning the traditional arrays and returning objects via an existing ORM > > > that has been plugged in. Maybe this toggle could even be set application- > > > or controller-wide via the configuration system, or at run time for more > > > granular control. Doctrine offers this toggle out of the box, for example. > > > > This way, developers have a choice to migrate all, some, or none of an > > > existing application to an object oriented model system. Maybe there's > > > something about Cake's design that would make even this kind of > > > architecture > > > unfeasibly difficult, but based on my (admittedly rusty) understanding of > > > Cake's internals, it shouldn't be too bad. Core system components could > > > transparently continue to use the array access method as long as they > > > needed > > > to, and userland code could break free of arrays if it wanted to. > > > > Having been away for a few years, I'm actually a bit amazed (and > > > disappointed) that the 2.0 release isn't being used as an opportunity to > > > bring Cake more fully into the world of OOP. I'm not one to complain about > > > open source software though...I have much to be thankful for. > > > > -SS
-- Our newest site for the community: CakePHP Video Tutorials http://tv.cakephp.org Check out the new CakePHP Questions site http://ask.cakephp.org and help others with their CakePHP related questions. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to cake-php+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/cake-php
