> > But "property" is such a nice, clean, simple building block. Why > > pollute it by adding more functionality and making it more complex? > > Because then you can extend the concept without limit. It's like > "function" in mathematics. You can construct functions from > functions. But if such constructs were no longer functions, you'd > get stuck.
To abuse your analogy, our properties is like "constants" in mathematics. Classes would be "functions". A property is like "width = 5" or "impedance = 50". A class is a collection of properties, which could include a collection of classes or whatnot also. Creating a single object that has to act as both a name-value pair *and* an arbitrary container is not a good idea. _______________________________________________ geda-user mailing list [email protected] http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
