On 6/23/06, P T Withington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
That sounds like a good idea to me. It certainly would unobfuscate
things a bit.
Shall I assign http://www.openlaszlo.org/jira/browse/LPP-1326 to you?
On 2006-06-23, at 17:31 EDT, Henry Minsky wrote:
> Should we add a new arg that's passed in to the runtime? That is,
> we now
> pass in
> a list of attributes, $events (handlers), and $refs (constraints).
> Should we
> also pass in something
> which is the list of declared events, which should get initialized
> to the
> sentinel event?
>
> Maybe we should rename $refs to $constraints, and $events to
> $eventhandlers,and add $events as the new
> arg?
>
>
>
> On 6/23/06, Henry Minsky < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Yeah I think now would be better than later.
>> A declared event needs to get initialized to something, and it has to
>> happen pretty early.
>> We're using the sentinel object now, there was some talk of making
>> it so
>> the compiler expanded
>> sendEvent to do a check for null instead? I guess we can overlap
>> these
>> implementations, and if the
>> compiler check is implemented then we could then just bind the
>> sentinel
>> object to null..
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > > Sounds like it should definitely be initialized to the sentinel
>> > > array...
>> >
>> > As the TODO says, this is a fragile area of the tag compiler
>> stemming
>> > from treating an event declaration as an attribute declaration. It
>> > might work to use the sentinel event instead of null, but
>> perhaps we
>> > want to consider if now is the time to split events from
>> attributes?
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
--
Henry Minsky
Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________ Laszlo-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
