Re: V2 and referential integrity

I'll tell you why I settled on the convention I showed. I have to set
all my other components Active = True, and then to False in my datamodule's
OnDestroy, so for me it's just less confusing to treat tables the same
rather than switch gears just to write shorter code. I almost always make
use of begin..end..Else..begin..end; statements for all my code even when I
could write it if..then..else as well because then my code is consistent
throughout. There shouldn't be any difference in the compiled code so I
just do whatever is easier for me to read without having to think! <g>

--
from Robert Meek dba "Tangentals Design"
Personal e-mail: rmeek1@comcast.net

-------------------------------------------------
visit us on the World Wide Web and pick up
your free copy of "The Keep" at:

http://www.TangentalsDesign.com

E-mail us at one of the following:

information@tangentalsdesign.com
feedback@tangentalsdesign.com
support@tangentalsdesign.com
-------------------------------------------------

"Anders Gustavsson" <s.anders.gustavsson@telia.com> wrote in message
news:4232fea9$1@wic040d....
> As far as I understand what you say, everything seems logical. I think
> you can go anyway around - EM is built in Delphi, so what they can do
> internally you should be able to do in your own code. You can easily
> create the tables in EM and then let your table components hold field
> and indexdefs and use createtable. How you go about RI in this case is
> beyond my experience but it should be possible.
>
> Just to simplify things, your last example could easily be done this
> way:
>
> if not DKUsersTable.Exists then
> DKUsersTable.CreateTable;
> DKUsersTable.Open;

Sure, my main point really was that you can move the Active := True
outside the if-clause, it will happen anyway ;-)

/Anders