On Mon, Jan 21, 2008 at 10:26:54PM -0200, Leandro Lucarella <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Because we cannot initialise that static variable, or the user again ahs to
> > call a method, which brings us back to the beginning of havign a method that
> > needs to be called.
>
> User will need to call a method/funtion always,
Not with the solution I proposed, no?
> calling the constructor is less explicit, but you didn't like the explicit
> instantiation either. So I don't understand what's your idea.
Giving the user a variable instead of having to call a method.
> > Remember the reason for this static thingabob was to avoid having to call
> > a method in the first place.
>
> I don't remember. I don't understand what you mean either :)
Well, read back the e-mail thread then :)
The starting point was that we would like to have a cariable instead of
havign to call a function (a syntactical thing), and I provided a way to do
that.
The redeeming quality of that is that we could replace it by a variable at
a later time.
--
The choice of a Deliantra, the free code+content MORPG
-----==- _GNU_ http://www.deliantra.net
----==-- _ generation
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
_______________________________________________
libev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.schmorp.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libev
