On Oct 19, 8:15 pm, pps <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Are you talking about google maps reference page link to overlay
> requirements? I repeat once again, it doesn't deal with inheritance.

And I repeat once again: It does.
I suggest that you do some reading on **abstract** methods, and stop
insulting Google if you want to remain popular in this forum.

--
Marcelo - http://maps.forum.nu
--





> It
> deals with implementing a new overlay. Try to implement Rectangle as
> they do in the example, but implement it properly: Ractangle is a
> Polygon, so it should inherit from GPolygon and not created from scratch.
> By the way, is it only me or everyone feels that. That gmaps api
> reference page is created in a way that makes me avoid visiting it if
> possible. On loading it freezes entire browser for seconds while their
> dog slow syntax hylighter does it's black job. I actually thought that I
> have some weird problems with my firefox, googled for "firefox slow" and
> reinstalled it completely! :) only after that I realized that it's the
> page's fault and not my firefox. WTF?? I have a q6600 cpu, I wonder how
> it feels on some more outdated cpu. Does it even load?? :))
>
> >> GPolygon is a working fine, so I don't need
> >> to add anything to it to make it work.
>
> > Yes, you do. Did you look at Esa's link?
> > Quote from that link:
> > "The GOverlay interface requires you to implement four abstract
> > methods:"
>
> >> That means that if I properly
> >> extend GPolygon I wouldn't need to implement these interfaces unless
> >> implementations from GPolygon should be changed for GCircle.
>
> > No. It doesn't work like that. See Esa's link.
>
> Well, I don't see any reason. I call a Circle constructor, it calculates
> vrtices and internally calls constructor of GPolygon using calculated
> vertices. The rest GCircle should behave just like regular polygon. So,
> why would I need to implement anything that's already implemented in
> GPolygon and suits me well??
>
> (pseudo syntax)
>
> function animal {
>         this.name = "animal";
>
> }
>
> animal.prototype.say = function(){ alert(this.name); }
>
> function cat extends animal {
>         animal(this);
>         this.name = "cat";
>
> }
>
> Now, cat behaves like animal but changes constructor slightly. Do I need
> to modify say()? Probably I don't, so why would I need to do something
> like that if I inherit from GPolygon?... all I want is to inherit,
> modify constructor and keep the rest as is. The problem is that GPolygon
> is implemented is some weird way so that nothing works if you try to
> inherit from it. All gmaps code is chinese to me, they probably use some
> obfuscator or js compressor, so that I can't see what exactly goes on to
> understand what I need to do to inherit from GPolygon and not break all
> other code. If there was any good debugger so that I could step through
> the code and see what's up... but whatever I tried I couldn't use
> (something for Firefox opened me some five horizontal panes that made
> absolutely no sense to me, I didn't see call stack and I didn't see code
> itself ;))
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Maps API" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-api?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to