Re: Strange error message

Hi Pierre,

thanks again for being so helpful on this topic!
>> thanks for the exhaustive note. I'm still not sure why this wouldn't
>> affect to-many relationships or how to work around this in a more
>> general fashion.
>
> to-many relationships could be affected the same way. I used the 
> to-one relationship mainly as an example.

OK.

>> I'm not sure what you mean: if I don't model the inheritance, would I
>> include Vehicle in my model? If I don't, then how could I have a
>> relationship to it? You don't happen to have a working example handy 
>> ?-)
>
> That's the advantage of not having the Vehicle entity in the EOModel. 
> You should not have relationships pointing to it.

OK.

> Having it outside the model eliminates all risks to create such a 
> relationship later on in the project's lifetime. You may not call a 
> fetch specification on the root entity if primary keys are not unique 
> on the children.

So basically if I *need* such a relationship - for sinister purposes of 
my own - then the simplest way would be to split it up into multiple 
relationship (toCars,toBicylces) and join them together manually to a 
toVehicles? This would at least work for fetching things, if not for 
adding new ones. Those must be added to the specialized relationships.

> I do have examples where the root enity is not declared in the 
> EOModel. However I don't see how I could strip them down to a point to 
> become helpful examples.

You have done more than enough already. Thanks anyway!

> There is nothing magic about having inheritance outside the EOModel.

Yes, I've already done that.

> You simply need to manually create the root class as subclass of 
> EOGenericRecord. In that root class you define methods common to all 
> subclasses as abstract method. Your subclasses only need to inherit 
> from that class rather than from EOGenericRecord. With appropriate 
> templates and Makefile entries you can easily set this up with 
> EOGenerator.

Sure, I'm still pretty miffed why there is no simpler (read: less code, 
more general) solution to this...

Cheers, Anjo