I drank deeply from the “dynamic variables” Koolaid well with the release of V12. As soon as I started working with Form.foo, I ran headlong into the issue described above.
The email thread "One Set of Code for Form Object Populated Forms as well as Field-Based Detail View Forms” may shed some light on the topic. -- Douglas von Roeder 949-910-4084 On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 10:15 AM lists via 4D_Tech <4d_tech@lists.4d.com> wrote: > OK, so can we get a real example of how to replace the *old* way with the > new? In a case where there are several entry objects: > > Form.Name > Form.Address > Form.Note > > I want to enforce a proper uppercase/lowercase on all three, so in the old > days I created an object, set the method to "UpperLower(self)", duplicated > it three times, change the object name and I'm done. For simplicity sake, > lets say that UpperLower simply do $1->:=Uppercase($1->). > > How would you do the same while using object notation instead of a > variable, dynamic or not? > > Thanks, > > Lahav > > > -----Original Message----- > From: 4D_Tech <4d_tech-boun...@lists.4d.com> On Behalf Of Keisuke Miyako > via 4D_Tech > Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 10:14 AM > To: 4D iNug Technical <4d_tech@lists.4d.com> > Cc: Keisuke Miyako <keisuke.miy...@4d.com> > Subject: Re: Object notation replacement for use of Self in a script — v18 > > my feeling is that generic coding is very much possible in object > notation, but we need to accept that the approach is different. > > if you prefer to use pointers such as "Self", I think it's best to avoid > object notation, at least if your goal is to make the code generic. > > it's not a defect of object notation, > but the way to write generic code is different. > > if you want to make your code generic in object notation, I think you need > to fully commit. > > what I mean by that, is that you need to think of objects and classes, > properties and methods. > > basically, instead of > > doIt(Self) > > you would write > > $obj.doIt() > > where the doIt() formula works on "This". > > in my opinion, to take full advantage of object notation, it is pretty > much mandatory to use > > This > Signal > Formula > Form > > extensively, as well as > > Storage > New shared object > New shared collection > > strategically. > > simply replacing interprocess/process variables with object notation, may > semantically look like object based coding, but at that level you may be > losing major advantages of classic code, while not gaining much from what > the new way of coding has to offer. > > > On Apr 29, 2020, at 14:55, Chris Belanger via 4D_Tech < > 4d_tech@lists.4d.com> wrote: > > And v18r3 does not even have a solution to this in its documentation. > > ********************************************************************** > 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) > Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html > Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech > Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com > ********************************************************************** > ********************************************************************** > 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) > Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html > Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech > Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com > ********************************************************************** ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com **********************************************************************
