@Malcolm Edgar
My friends from Luxoft and Exigen Services use Rich Domain Model, also it
is used by Fowler, Evans.
Just read
http://www.amazon.com/Domain-Driven-Design-Tackling-Complexity-Software/dp/0321125215
It's really works. In perspective of multiple domains - for each creates
separate domai
s the best OOP design. And for me need to separate context only when
we need anvanced features that do not possible in current design.
2012/12/27 Дробеня Илья
> About my experience.
>
> I took part at projects where used all 3 wideused models.
>
> 1. Project with Anemic Domain
>
> From: Juan José Gil
> To: user@cayenne.apache.org; emeka okafor
> Sent: Wednesday, December 26, 2012 10:32 PM
> Subject: Re: Add ActiveRecord support to Cayenne
>
> @emeka, in that regar of having rich models, how are you resolving the
>
Ari, we may propose to users select schema that he want - maybe somebody
want tro use ActiveRecord. But classic Cayenne architecture will be used
anyway. But if user want - he may use ActiveRecord. From my perspective -
Cayenne - best framework for add this feature, and for RoR fans it may be
very
2012/12/19 Michael Gentry
> One of the dangers of having delete/save/update
Update method do not needed, delete method is useful - because it remove
entity from context.
And instead of save method - we may create methods - seems like
commitContext, rollbackContext.
Also we may create it in "Rol
F/WebObjects does that I find useful. However, I would
> lean towards creating an inner class for this along with a singleton called
> DAO and putting these methods there. So you would do
> Invoice.DAO.fetchAll(...)
>
> But I don't really need .delete() or .save()
>
&
Hi!
Now Cayenne usage in projects looks like data mapper (Fowler), but all
entities has dependecy on Cayenne (interface Persistent). For data mapper
it is disadvantage.
But it is acceptable for ActiveRecord. This is my first reason to propose
this solution. Second reason - we may simple add all po
