Hey Max,
Why are we using addProperty to declare some methods in drawview?
On Jan 8, 2008 12:38 PM, André Bargull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And what about (I don't want to say "dynamic", because it'd be ambiguous
> concerning AS3) classes like "drawview"? There is heavy use of
> "addProperty(..)" to add dynamically functions are runtime.
>
>
> > For classes, we can eventually make it
> > so that all the methods and handlers (including the anonymous ones)
> > are declared at compile time in
> > a class declaration.
> >
> > But what about views (i.e., instances rather than class declarations).
> > Maybe we say that they cannot
> > reference super() in their methods or handlers? That would be kind of
> > confusing. Especially as we
> > promote this style of programming where you first make methods on your
> > instance, and then
> > convert it to a class later. If you can't refer to super() in your
> > methods, you're somewhat restricted
> > for more sophisticated programming.
> >
> >
> > If a view has some methods or handlers declared, they get stuck into
> > the initial attributes list
> > as functions, like
> >
> > <view bgcolor="blue" width="40" height="40"
> > x="59" y="59"
> > onclick="this.setAttribute('x', 10);
> > this.setAttribute('y', 10)"/>
> >
> > {$delegates: ["onclick", "$m3", null], $m3: function
> > $hello$2Elzx_15_50_$m3 () {
> > this.setAttribute('x', 150);
> > this.setAttribute('y', 10)
> > },
> >
> >
> > One thought I had at one point was to convert every view that declares
> > methods or handlers into
> > a singleton class declaration, that seems like a pretty major step,
> > but maybe it's necessary!
> >
> >
> > Another thought;
> > I guess that for each user-class, the compiler could collect up all
> > the methods that are declared on all instances of that class,
> > and carefully map them to unique names and define them on the class,
> > but that seems a little
> > awkward. That seems even worse that making a singleton class for
> > instances that define methods.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Jan 8, 2008 9:49 AM, P T Withington <[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> >> That's a good question. You would have to test if super will work.
> >> My guess would be that it will not because I would think that only
> >> 'fixed' methods could participate in the class structure (i.e., that
> >> the super method is computed at compile time).
> >>
> >> Isn't this only needed because the tag compiler is not emitting class
> >> declarations? I would hope that when the tag compiler emits class
> >> declarations, it would declare all the methods.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2008-01-08, at 09:26 EST, Henry Minsky wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> The (Laszlo) Class.addProperty method is used by LzNode to install
> >>> methods dynamically.
> >>> I've got it implemented just as
> >>>
> >>> function addProperty(key:*,val:*):void {
> >>> this[key] = val;
> >>> }
> >>>
> >>> in the LzNode swf9 development world right now. Is there anything
> >>> else we need to when adding functions at runtime that refer to
> >>> superclass methods (or "super()" )
> >>> or will that "just work"?
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Henry Minsky
> >>> Software Architect
> >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > -- Henry Minsky Software Architect [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
Henry Minsky
Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
