Thomas Vandahl wrote:
> Tal Kramer wrote:
>   
>>    3.1 Wherever there was a direct reference to "BasePeer" in Peer.jm,
>> it was replaced by "${table.BasePeer}", e.g.
>>            return BasePeer.doInsert(criteria, con); >> return
>> ${table.BasePeer}.doInsert(criteria, con);
>>     
>
> This kind of bothers me. Are you positive that these replacements were
> necessary? If so, that would mean to me that the use of direct BasePeer
> calls must be considered a bug in the templates. Opinions?
>
> Bye, Thomas.
>
>   
I am not claiming that this was a bug, but these replacements are 
necessary. There is no other way to call the base class's methods but to 
change the .VM file.
To allow better use of super (static) class, this change is mandatory. 
Otherwise, I see no purpose to supply basePeer.

Tal Kramer


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: torque-dev-unsubscribe@db.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: torque-dev-help@db.apache.org