> Why do these fields have to be "taped together"? What is "taped together"? > > Why not just create a method that takes a user and updates the correct > columns in the record?
Sorry if "taped together" didn't make sense - I wanted to say that they belong together and should be seen as one Unit instead of two columns which need to import extra logic (with the method) to be bound together. If I use a method, I still have to add the two columns, initialize it with proper names and default values every time I want to use that logic. It still feels like a workaround as I have repetitive code, which results in copy & paste, what I want to avoid as much as possible. But ok, I'll use that workaround since I don't really see another way, if it's not possible to put something like a wrapper around two MappedFields. > > I hope that information helps understanding my problem... > > Not really. English is a very bad vehicle for design. Please give us your > schema or the interfaces at the Scala level. My code got really complex and I'm not sure what interfaces I should post here. I thought I already posted the relevant parts with the InstanceUser schema in the example... :S Thanks, Joern -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to lift...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en.
