> Particularly because a model class can only map to one table.

Why should that be the case?

Did you try ActiveRecord::Base.set_table_name ?

class SomeAsset < Asset
    set_table_name 'some_asset'
end


Another approach would be to include the Asset base functionality using 
'include'

class SomeAsset < ActiveRecord::Base
    include Asset
end

It should be more efficient than delegating methods...


Jacob Fugal schrieb:
> On 6/28/06, Peter Ertl <pertl / gmx.org> wrote:
>> delegation is powerful, no question...
>>
>> > but if SomeAsset and AnotherAsset instances each hold a delegate Asset
>>
>> why not simply use inheritance?
>>
>> it's not that bad :-)
>
> Woah... no one said inheritance was bad. Indeed, inheritance is what
> is desired here. But due to constraints from both ActiveRecord and the
> existing DB schema, we're just trying to find any way that works. And
> inheritance won't work here. Particularly because a model class can
> only map to one table. If you subclass an ActiveRecord model, the
> subclass is assumed to live in the same table (Single Table
> Inheritance). ActiveRecord doesn't currently support Multiple Table
> Inheritance (as far as I know). Thus inheritance, sadly, doesn't work
> for us here.
>
>> waaay tooo much java engineers here :-)
>
> Nope. Not the case. :) Just trying to solve a problem under constraint...
>
> Jacob Fugal