Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #9297

Re: .paid field vs .payment field

Show all headers | View raw

Julio Di Egidio wrote:

> On Thursday, 20 September 2018 21:33:18 UTC+2, Victor Porton  wrote:
> 
>> I am writing a class SimpleItem representing a non-recurrent (one-time)
>> purchase.
> 
> Call it SimplePurchase then, and have it "contain" a SimpleItem as well as
> a SimplePayment (there's hardly any reason not to abstract the two apart),
> as well as, maybe, a SimpleRefund... i.e. depending on your
> business-level, aka explicit, *requirements*.

No, SimpleItem already has foreign key to SimplePayment. There is no need 
for SimplePurchase to link to SimplePayment too.

> HTH,
> 
> Julio

-- 
Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org

Back to comp.programming | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

.paid field vs .payment field Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> - 2018-09-20 22:33 +0300
  Re: .paid field vs .payment field Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> - 2018-09-22 16:40 +0300
  Re: .paid field vs .payment field Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2018-09-22 07:11 -0700
    Re: .paid field vs .payment field Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> - 2018-09-22 17:17 +0300
      Re: .paid field vs .payment field Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2018-09-25 01:21 -0700
        Re: .paid field vs .payment field Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> - 2018-09-25 18:59 +0300
          Re: .paid field vs .payment field Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2018-09-25 09:43 -0700
  Re: .paid field vs .payment field Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2018-09-22 08:53 -0700

csiph-web