Order of table defs matters?

Mar 2, 2013 at 3:30 AM
Edited Mar 2, 2013 at 3:31 AM
Maybe this is an easy question, but I'm using Sterling in my phone project and I create new table defs as I develop and add more support for it.

Does the order in which you list the table definitions matter? I have two singleton settings models, DbSettings and LocalSettings, and at first I had LocalSettings defined first. Then a little later, I added the DbSettings definition above it.

Now Sterling throws an exception if I try to load the DbSettings saying it cannot cast LocalSettings to DbSettings.

Is this expected behavior? I didn't see order of table definitions mentioned in the docs. I assumed it did lookups based on the type of the table.
Mar 4, 2013 at 7:00 AM
I had this on my mental to-do-list to check it out. I'm not sure right now, but judging from your description, it probably is important. I'll try to have a look and see how it can be solved.
Mar 4, 2013 at 7:01 AM
This discussion has been copied to a work item. Click here to go to the work item and continue the discussion.