Thanks for the interest in my approach. My plan is to post the code -
two class methods, both named 'from' - to this list with a better
description of where they are added and some examples of how one might
use this functionality. I'm hoping to do so later today depending on
the time I have available.
Gil
On 3/11/2025 8:26 AM, Josep Maria Blasco wrote:
Hi Rony,
Missatge de Rony G. Flatscher <rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at> del dia dl.,
10 de març 2025 a les 17:44:
Hi Josep Maria,
On 09.03.2025 14:40, Josep Maria Blasco wrote:
Missatge de Rony G. Flatscher <rony.flatsc...@wu.ac.at> del dia
dg., 9 de març 2025 a les 14:04:
(cut)
1a) In order to create an ooRexx array from a stem array
the following method should be added to the stem class:
makeArrayFromStemArray
This name makes it clear that a stem array is to be
processed and that the resulting array should not have
the stem value with the tail 0.
(The existting stem method makeArray continues to create
an array that represents all tails of a stem, including
a tail with the value 0.)
I'm not sure that using "makeXXX" for the message names is a
good idea, because the request method of the Object class
uses the "make" pattern for class conversions.
Yes, that is the reason why using that name.
Ah, but a class called "ArrayFromStemArray" does not exist, and
that breaks the "make" semantics. Rexxref 5.4.1.18 "request"
says "Any conversion method *must return an object of the
requested class*. For example, makeArray must return an array"
(emphasis mine). But, since there is no such thing as an
ArrayFromStemArray class, this could be misleading.
Yes. The conversion method must start with "make" and be followed
by the classid (a string) supplied as argument to the .Object's
request method.
This protocol could be used for creating an array from a stem (by
implementing a method "make" || supplied_classId_as_arg, however,
there is already a makearray method defined for stem. Hence the
first idea to add the variant to the name of the conversion method
yielding "makeArrayFromStemArray". The reason being that .Object's
request method does only accept the classid argument and by using
another name that includes the intent ("fromStemArray") one could
add another make conversion method to the stem class. However, I
concur that a) the name becomes too long and b) probably "classid"
should be an existing classid. :) Then it becomes possibel to
change the name of the method tonot start with "make" hence not
adhering to the request protocol.
Exactly!
In the meantime Gil's idea seems to be interesting.
I like it too. Very elegant, simple and easy to remember.
Josep Maria
---rony
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
--
Gil Barmwater
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
