On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 22:43, Aaron Newton <[email protected]> wrote:
1) if you have shared objects between classes, put them in closures to avoid
global scope:
i know this. It just seems cool to be able to point to a shared variable
using this (same as using private static variables in other OOP languages
such as PHP). but i guess that in order for this to work it needs to be much
more transparent (for example adding a statics member that will contain
these static variables). i would have tried to implement something like this
but if you say this is deep within the core file i doubt this will be easy
to overload.
You'll see that this method iterates over all the properties, dereferencing
> all the objects and arrays to prevent this pollution. However, it switches
> on the type of property, dereferencing arrays and object. Hash, however,
> returns $type "hash" (*$type($H({})) == "hash"*), so it doesn't
> dereference. That's why instantiating the hash from a property on
> instantiation will work.
>
the querstion is if this is simply an overlooked scenario or if this is a
wanted behavior
>
> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Roman Land <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> errr not initialization class - initialization method ..
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 11:04 PM, Roman Land <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>> @Aaron, good tip, will see if I can use that also.
>>>
>>> @Eneko, that is my understanding also, although knowing JS I am not sure
>>> how it will behave further down the road when they overwrite the same value,
>>> they might split into two different objects with overlaps and complement
>>> each other.. (my JS experience with this is limited.. please someone correct
>>> me if I am wrong..)
>>> Also, I dont want to overload the initialization class, this looks messy
>>> and hard to understand what are the instance variables are..
>>>
>>> Might I suggest this "feature" be documented somehow? :)
>>>
>>> I will open a light house ticket to see if I can pass this ..
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 10:54 PM, Eneko Alonso
>>> <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>
>>>> From my understanding, without getting in depth of how Mootools works,
>>>> here is what happens:
>>>>
>>>> When the js parser executes the line "MyClass = new Class.." it creates
>>>> the native object that is passed to the Class function. In order to create
>>>> this native object, it has to create an instance of a Hash, which gets
>>>> assigned to the myHash property.
>>>>
>>>> So far, we have a hash object created in memory and the result object
>>>> returned by Class. This resulting object has a pointer to the Hash object
>>>> in
>>>> memory: the myHash property.
>>>>
>>>> When you create new instances of this object, you are just cloning that
>>>> pointer, which keeps pointing to the same Hash object in memory. Again,
>>>> these two lines do not create a new instance of a Hash, but just clone the
>>>> pointer to the original instance.
>>>>
>>>> a = new MyClass();
>>>> b = new MyClass();
>>>>
>>>> If I'm not mistaken, this would happen with any object instanced in the
>>>> declaration of a class.
>>>>
>>>> In the other hand, when you put something in the initialize method
>>>> (class constructor), it does not get executed until the class (MyClass) is
>>>> instantiated.
>>>>
>>>> That's why, in general, class properties should be only static values
>>>> and everything that requires instantiating new objects should be done in
>>>> the
>>>> constructor.
>>>>
>>>> Please, let me know if I'm wrong.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 12:15 PM, Roman Land <[email protected]>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I found out (the "bug" way ;) ) that if I write a class like so:
>>>>>
>>>>> MyClass = new Class({
>>>>>
>>>>> myHash : new Hash()
>>>>>
>>>>> })
>>>>>
>>>>> Later I will use this class
>>>>>
>>>>> a = new MyClass();
>>>>>
>>>>> b = new MyClass();
>>>>>
>>>>> I would seem that the hash is actually being shared :P
>>>>> My work around is to init the hash in the "initialize" method.
>>>>>
>>>>> Any thought about this? I dont like the aesthetics of this
>>>>> implementation...
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> Roman
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> ---
>>>>> "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."
>>>>>
>>>>> - Albert Einstein
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> ---
>>> "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."
>>>
>>> - Albert Einstein
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> ---
>> "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."
>>
>> - Albert Einstein
>>
>>
>
