Am Fr,26.09.2008 um 03:08 schrieb Jerry Krinock:
When I first looked at Core Data, I saw that there was no such
attribute type as "Array" or "Set", and concluded that collections
must be modelled as relationships. This would be overkill in many
cases, for example, in a Person type of application if you wanted to
list the names of each Person's pets, but had no interest in the
pets themselves.
If $user changes the name of one person, the names of the pets
shouldn't be changed, too?
This "overkill" simply avoids redundancy to ensure consistency.
So, one way I worked around this was to store the pet names as an
attribute petNamesString of type String, using a delimiter
character, and transforming on the way in and out of the store.
This seems to be "overkill". ;-)
But now I find there is an even more natural way, which is to just
leave them as a set or array, and store in an attribute of type
Transformable. The default transformer en/decodes the collection
into/from an NSData, and everything "just works".
I'm surprised that I've never seen this discussed or documented. Is
this going to get me into any trouble?
Yes, because you get redundant and inconsistent model.
Cheers
Amin Negm-Awad
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.apple.com)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
