|
| Re: [Transaction] Using ChangeCommand with EMF Transaction [message #1274637 is a reply to message #1274524] |
Fri, 21 March 2014 19:17  |
|
Hi, Scott,
See some replies in-line, below.
HTH,
Christian
On 2014-03-21 15:40:33 +0000, scott@xxxxxxxx said:
> My RCP-based application uses ChangeCommand quite a bit and now I would
> like to convert my application from base EMF (EditingDomain, etc) to
> using EMF Transaction (TransactionalEditingDomain, etc).
>
> 1. Is the use of ChangeCommand supported?
It should be, yes. EMF Transaction will treat this as it does any
other Command that isn't a RecordingCommand: it will expect it to know
how to undo and redo itself, which of course it does.
> 2. If so, what are the pros/cons for using EMF Transaction's
> RecordingCommand vs. ChangeCommand?
Not much, except perhaps most significantly that using RecordingCommand
ties your code to a TransactionalEditingDomain: you wouldn't be able
to reuse it in a core EMF context.
You should be able to create ChangeCommands with the
TransactionChangeRecorder already attached to the
TransactionalEditingDomain to avoid the necessity of the command
creating its own on-the-fly, which for large resource sets could
perhaps produce some performance drag. best of both worlds:
reusability and performance!
>
> Thanks,
>
> Scott
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.02960 seconds
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
