Hello, I know this topic comes up on the list from time to time, but I just need a quick sanity check.
I have two entities, A and B. For every A, there is a corresponding B. For some subset of all Bs, each has a corresponding A. Currently I have modelled this with a single relationship from A to B, so that's a mandatory to-one relationship. (Alternatively, I could have modelled it with an optional to-one relationship from B to A.) At different times, I need to traverse this relationship in both directions. For any A, A.b() will give me the related B. But for the reverse direction, say I have a B and I want its A (if it has one), I have a custom method B.a() which does a fetch for the A such that A.b() is the B of interest. Sometimes, though, I just want to know if there is an A for a particular B, or whether it's null, and in this setting, the fetch is expensive. Here's where I need the sanity check: is there a way, given the constraints above, to model an inverse to-one relationship from B to A such that it appears as the inverse to EOF? That is, such that calling, say, A.addObjectToBothSidesOfRelationshipWithKey(B, "b") does both A.setB(B) and B.setA(A)? I'm assuming there's not, as I certainly can't beat the model into doing it. I can work around it by doing the right thing at creation time for every A, I just wanted to know if I was missing something where EOF (or Wonder) would handle this automagically. -- Paul. http://logicsquad.net/ _______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
