On Wednesday, February 15, 2012 03:49:36 PM Vineet Deodhar wrote:

> > Message: 8

> >

> >> Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2012 10:50:56 -0600

> >> From: Ed Leafe <ed@leafe.com>

> >>

> >> On Feb 9, 2012, at 10:28 AM, Vineet Deodhar wrote:

> >> > To make my question more clear, pl. consider the vfp cursor

> >> > adapter.

> >> > In the cursors added to data-environment, records are either

> >> > updated or marked for deletion or appended.

> >> > At the end, with just a single call, it takes care of the CRUD

> >> > functions automatically.

> >> >

> >> > Whether such behaviour like vfp CA is possible here?

> >> >

> >> Dabo works the same with one exception: deleting a

> >> record happens

> >>

> >> immediately, whereas the other changes (append/update) are buffered.

> >> Those changes exist in the local cursor's data, and when you call

> >> save(), they are all written to the backend. Likewise, you can call

> >> cancel() to revert those changes at any time before writing them with

> >> the save() call.

> Digging-up an old thread again :)

>

> I notice one difference between vfp CA & dabo:

> Pl. do not think that I am showing-off shortcomings of dabo.

> But I am trying to think how it can be made to suit my purpose.

>

> Agreed that append & update are buffered.

> But a single save() call would not be sufficient to save them at single shot

> As we all know,

> -- For handling the save of 'appended' records, we need to call new() first.

> (no need for seek() & setFieldVal() )

>

> -- For handling the save of 'updated' records, seek() & setFieldVal() are

> required (of course).

>

> -- For delete, seek() & delete() are required.

>

> In vfp CA, no such extra work is necessary.

>

> I am just wondering how this whole stuff can be achieved in dabo.

> Thinking of adding flags to the records (dicts) for append/update/delete.

> But not sure how to proceed

>

> Any thoughts?

What you say is true in general (that assumes I understood everything in your

post). VFP CA's were something like a "do all interface to general data".

But try using joins, or special sub-selects within the CA. I don't believe

you can then use many of the speical features. Everything is tied to a cursor

in an update sort of way. Which means that stored procedures outside of the

cursor did not work. So back in the day when I used VFP I reverted back to

SPT to access MsSQL.

CA's were useful to a point - but in the end I had to abandon them to get the

job done. They worked well when the solution was simple.

That is not to say that Dabo is perfect. I'd like a class that some how did

not immediately delete the data when the delete button was clicked. In fact I

normally do not allow an actual delete to take place. I normally have a field

(active type bool) that I use to simulate deletes.

I'm biased because what has to be done in Dabo is exactly what I had to do in

VFP.

Johnf

_______________________________________________

Post Messages to: Dabo-users@leafe.com

Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-users

Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-users

This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/6017148.ULYoYzUNlQ@linux-12