* Øystein Grøvlen <Oystein.Grovlen@stripped> [09/05/22 21:05]:
> So far my Value object knows nothing about arithmetics, all they know
> about is how to convert between types. However, it needs to distinguish
> between more than just four types. For example, conversion between
> integer and string will be different for a Field_timestamp than for a
This just doesn't make sense to me. It's like saying that
conversion between an integer and a string will be different
depending whether this integer represents a datetime or, well, an
Isn't it easier to say (and code) that a conversion from an
integer to a string is not the same as conversion from a datetime to
a string? What am I missing?
Perhaps we need to talk on IRC to better understand the language.
> AFAIU, this is not within the scope of the task I have been given and
> how it is reflected in the worklog description. However, the worklog
> has not yet been approved so it remains to see if I have misunderstood.
What is the scope of the task?
> The way I have understood it from discussions in the re-engineering
> team, I am not going to transfer ownership of data from Item to Value.
> So far, Value objects are just used for return values that can easily
> converted to other types.
A Value object that doesn't hold any value... perhaps should be
called something else.