At 01:19 PM 9/2/2002 -0700, you wrote: >On Monday, September 2, 2002, at 10:28 , Jeffry Houser wrote: > > :hmm: That is interesting. I don't like un-named scopes. I wish > > someone at Macromedia took a little time to document this stuff. > >I did, it's on my blog :) But I know what you mean! The bug is that >'variables' scope inside a component is supposed to be the private scope >(and unnamed scopes default to 'variables' scope).
I need to start reading those blogs more often. > > I thought the variable was automatically put into the this scope. I > >Nope. It's safer this way - you have to explicitly request a public >variable. Yes, I can see that. > > have to agree with Hal on this one. That is a kludge. The scope should > > have a name. A scope named private would have been a better option. > >And "this" would better be named "public" or something similar (however, >since it compiles to Java, naming scopes as keywords is probably a bad >idea). I would have to agree with you there. > > Allow me to bang my head on the desk. I was using the two terms > > interchangeably. > >No probs. A lot of people get them confused. And OO implementation is not my speciality. > > I doubled checked my OO book and it uses the term overloading > > exclusively. What exactly is overriding, then? > >Which book is that? Sounds like a bad one... The book is Object Oriented Programming by Timothy Budd. It is an older one (1991 if memory serves me). The book was designed to not be language specific and I think it does a good job. It goes into a bunch of languages at a very high level, but most of those aren't really used all that much in today's world. It looks like "revision 3" is now available on Amazon.com. I think I have revision 1. When I said it used overloading exclusively, I was referring specifically to the introductory chapter where it is talking about the differences of Objects over ADTs, modules, and procedures. >Overriding is where you define a method in a base class and you 'override' > that definition in a derived class. When you call the method on an >instance of the derived type, you get the function from the derived class. > If a function is only defined in the base class (and not overridden) then >you can still call it on a derived instance (and get the base class >version). > >Overloading is where you have more than one function - in the same scope - >with the same name but different signatures (parameters). When you call >the function, the compiler selects which signature to call based on the >argument types. Now I just have to remember the differences. :) > > ;) Then I'm sure you'll have no trouble drilling the differences > > between > > overloading and overriding into my head? > >Does my explanation above help? Yes, perfect. Thanks! I am quite enjoying this conversation. -- Jeffry Houser | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Need a Web Developer? Contact me! AIM: Reboog711 | Phone: 1-203-379-0773 -- My CFMX Book: <http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0072225564/instantcoldfu-20> My Books: http://www.instantcoldfusion.com My Band: http://www.farcryfly.com ______________________________________________________________________ Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm FAQ: http://www.thenetprofits.co.uk/coldfusion/faq Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
