On Jun 25, 2013, at 22:57 , Luther Baker <lutherba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> At the risk of sounding like an idiot for stating the obvious ... why not > create a (dummy) inverse relationship (Child.activeParent)? No one says you > have to use it ... or heck, maybe you want to use it. > > Parent.children <-------->> Child.parent > Parent.activeChild <---------> Child.activeParent > > I just tested this and it works as expected. IE: setting Parent.activeChild > to different children between saves cleans up both ends of the relationship > automatically (each subsequent child's 'activeParent' field was > automatically cleared when I set a different child to the > Parent.activeChild property). > > I don't know, maybe I missed something. I think that works, and I've done it before, but I find it very kludgey. I think I prefer the one-way-with-prepareForDeletion approach instead. -- Rick _______________________________________________ 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: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/cocoa-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
