Cedric Bosdonnat wrote:
Hi Stephan
Stephan Bergmann a écrit :
Indeed, your right, however, I still wonder why there is a difference
with my xxx.setAAA and y.AAA...
Sorry, I lost you here. What exactly is it that you still wonder about?
In a Basic macro, I used a xxx.getAAA which doesn't works and I had to
use xxx.AAA to get the correct result, but I thought that both where
equivalent. I just wanted to know if this behaviour was normal...
They are *NOT* equivalent (it is like comparing oranges and apples):
1 Abstract UNO:
interface X { [attribute, readonly] long A; };
2 UNO C++ language binding:
class X { public: sal_Int32 getA(); };
sal_Int32 n = o->getA();
3 UNO Basic language binding:
n = o.A;
Only within 2 (the UNO C++ language binding) does the notion of "getA"
exist---that is why I earlier wrote that it is an "implementation
detail" of the UNO C++ language binding.
Hope this explains it better,
-Stephan
Cedric
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
