23370 Posts in 18145 Topics by 2864 members
|Go to End|
13 February 2013 at 11:44pm Last edited: 14 February 2013 12:16am
Hey guys. I want to create an abstract DataObject but as many know, the database builder (and likely other things) don't like this.
I think this would be a pretty useful feature to have, as without it, we have to take some weird steps around the lack of support.
What is the lead dev consensus on this? Is it worth working on, and if so, what version would you want it in?
14 February 2013 at 9:10pm
what version would you want it in?
This would be a change for 3.2 as 3.1 is in testing nearing release so probably too late to get something like this in as I'm not sure what would break. As far as I know, you cannot have an abstract class extend a non abstract class so you'd need to look at making the whole DO chain abstract (viewable data, I think Object already is). To me it makes semantic sense for it to be abstract (you don't create a DataObject, in that case you'd use ArrayData).
|Go to Top|