You are right. It would be a problem when you overwrite methods, because it
would overwrite all widgets methods. Oh well.
Rob
> You can do that because you'd be adding all methods from all widgets
> onto the same DynLayer prototype. There would be no distinction
> between a Label and Button widget except for their constructors.
>
> Dan Steinman
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 09, 2002 at 11:31:36AM -0500, Robert Rainwater wrote: > I
> guess it is simpler than I thought: > DynLayer.getPrototype =
> function() { > if (!DynLayer._prototype) DynLayer._prototype=new
> DynLayer; > return DynLayer._prototype; > } > > ex: >
> MyWidget.prototype = DynLayer.getPrototype(); > > > It seems a waste
> for every DynLayer subclass to do: > > > > MyWidget.prototype = new
> DynLayer; > > > > The purpose here is to create the prototype chain
> from the DynLayer. > > So why are we creating a new DynLayer for each
> widget. Why not reuse > > the same object. Like saying: > > > >
> DynLayerConst = new DynLayer; > > > > then say: > > > >
> MyWidget.prototype = DynLayerConst > > for each widget. > > > > The
> only problem is when to create the DynLayerConst. It has to be > >
> done after the DynLayer has loaded and any of its extensions (like > >
> mouse.js). Any ideas? > > > > Rob > > > >
> _______________________________________________ > > Dynapi-Dev mailing
> list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
> http://www.mail-archive.com/dynapi-dev@lists.sourceforge.net/ > > > >
> _______________________________________________ > Dynapi-Dev mailing
> list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
> http://www.mail-archive.com/dynapi-dev@lists.sourceforge.net/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dynapi-Dev mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.mail-archive.com/dynapi-dev@lists.sourceforge.net/
_______________________________________________
Dynapi-Dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.mail-archive.com/dynapi-dev@lists.sourceforge.net/
