I don't actually see anything ever setting an AttributeSpec's type to SETTER_TYPE. Should ClassCompiler be adding an entry for a setter for an attribute 'foo' in addition to declaring the $lzc$set_foo method?
On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 9:58 AM, P T Withington <[email protected]> wrote: > Change 20091105-ptw-L by [email protected] on 2009-11-05 09:44:40 EST > in /Users/ptw/OpenLaszlo/trunk > for http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/trunk > > Summary: Support setters in interfaces > > Bugs Fixed: LPP-7184 Binary libraries don't work in swf9 (partial) > > Technical Reviewer: hminksy (pending) > QA Reviewer: max (pending) > > Overview: > > Setters were missing from library interfaces so the swf9 back-end > could not compute `override` for setter methods from libraries. > > Details: > > ClassCompiler: Note <setter> as a method with the internal name > > NodeModel: Look up setters when computing override > > AttributeSpec: Unparse setters into interfaces > > Tests: > smokecheck > > Files: > M WEB-INF/lps/server/src/org/openlaszlo/compiler/ClassCompiler.java > M WEB-INF/lps/server/src/org/openlaszlo/compiler/NodeModel.java > M WEB-INF/lps/server/src/org/openlaszlo/compiler/AttributeSpec.java > > > Changeset: http://svn.openlaszlo.org/openlaszlo/patches/20091105-ptw-L.tar > -- Henry Minsky Software Architect [email protected]
_______________________________________________ Laszlo-reviews mailing list [email protected] http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-reviews
