Persist or not persist : comment
Thomas M. Farrelly
Thu, 21 Oct 1999 13:40:22 GMT
This is a comment on the discussion on using explisit save or delete in a
Practically I agree with the conclusion that _both_ are useful, and both
should be avaliable. But...
The point of persistence, IMHO, is to make the linking between "the object
as you operate on it" and "the object as it is stored" implisit. Eliminating
all the temporary storing and moving back and forth of data from everyday
So, in a persistent system there is nothing such as "save", because you are
_never_ operating on a copy of an object, _only_ real objects. Objects
change if you change them and are permanent - they last as long as their
In a persistent system "save" would constitute a "copy" from one
not-so-permanent context to a more permanent context. A "backup", would be a
copy to a very permanent context.
Anyway, when it comes to "deleting", surely that must be an option.
"deleting" as a compliment to "creating" - not "deleting" as a way to hack
around an "automatic save" mechanism.
Advice or whatever ( what I would do ): Forget about explisit deletion and
saving, and think EXPLISIT COPYING. You will need a copying mechanism
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com