> On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 12:01 AM, Eric Lemoine
> <eric.lemo...@camptocamp.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, Aug 6, 2011 at 9:32 PM, RICHARD Didier <didier.rich...@ign.fr>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2/ in test 4, if you remove the initialize function from B and
>>>>>>>> overload
>>>>>>>> A,
>>>>>>>> the B constructor is still the previous A's constructor.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes. To address this one I see no other solution than patching
>>>>>>> OpenLayers.Class. See the patch attached to this email, and my
>>>>>>> test_overload_5 test function. The Class.html tests continue to
>>>>>>> pass
>>>>>>> with my patch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> this works in OL 2.11, not in OL 2.10 for me !-(
>>>>>> I guess there is something similar to do in OL 2.10 ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Your initial mail was about OpenLayers trunk/2.11 introducing
>>>>> regressions. Now the failing test that remains is OL 2.10-only, so OL
>>>>> trunk/2.11 works better than OL 2.10 for you. Yippee! :-)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> My initial mail was really about regression between 2.10 and 2.11 !-)
>>>>
>>>>> (Not sure it is worth "fixing" OL 2.10 for that.)
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Well, one of my test is versus the current release (2.10) and I am
>>>> sure
>>>> there are users that will migrate slower than us (I mean OL and IGNF)
>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>> I do think it is worth fixing it ... at least to prove there is no
>>>> regression !-D
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've got somethinf working, hence ugly :-)
>>>
>>> OpenLayers.overload= function(P,F) {
>>> var pProtoInitialize= typeof(F.initialize)=="function"?
>>> P.prototype.initialize
>>> : null;
>>> OpenLayers.Util.extend(P.prototype, F);
>>> if (pProtoInitialize!==null) {
>>> // override sub-class having same constructor:
>>> for (var pn in P) {
>>> if (typeof(P[pn])=='function' &&
>>> P[pn].prototype.initialize===pProtoInitialize) {
>>> var f= {};
>>> eval('f=
>>> {"initialize":'+F.initialize.toString()+'}');
>>> P[pn]= OpenLayers.overload(P[pn],f);
>>> }
>>> }
>>> }
>>>
>>> return P;
>>> };
>>
>> Hi Didier. Just to say that I personally wouldn't rely on an overload
>> function that assumes subclasses use their parent constructors as
>> their namespaces.
>
> I can't imagine a clean/correct implementation of your "overload"
> function that would make test_overload_5 pass with 2.10. If we apply
> the OL patch that I've proposed we can address this test case in 2.11
> (or 2.12). I still don't understand if that would be ok for you.
>
>
> function test_overload_5(t) {
> // overload constructor of parent class
> t.plan(1);
> var A = OpenLayers.Class({
> initialize: function() {
> this.a = "foo";
> }
> });
> var B = OpenLayers.Class(A, {});
> A = overload(A, {
> initialize: function() {
> this.a = "bar";
> }
> });
> var b = new B;
> t.eq(b.a, "bar", "ctor overloaded");
> }
>
Hi Eric,
With your proposed patch, I am very happy (for the moment, my tests are
working, but I still have some issues --surely be related to 2.10 to 2.11
port in our Geoportal's API--).
If your patch is included in 2.11, it would be great.
For the 2.10 case, if I am the only one that takes care of that, then it
is not an OpenLayers's community issue !-)
Regards,
didier
>
> --
> Eric Lemoine
>
> Camptocamp France SAS
> Savoie Technolac, BP 352
> 73377 Le Bourget du Lac, Cedex
>
> Tel : 00 33 4 79 44 44 96
> Mail : eric.lemo...@camptocamp.com
> http://www.camptocamp.com
>
--
RICHARD Didier - Chef du pôle technique du Géoportail
2/4, avenue Pasteur - 94165 Saint Mandé Cedex
Tél : +33 (0) 1 43 98 83 23
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
d...@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/openlayers-dev
