Hi Gerrit,
Gerrit Voss wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 11:26 +0100, Carsten Neumann wrote:
>> Aron Bierbaum wrote:
>
>> yes, that is one part, the others are a mistake in getType (- instead of
>> + used) and stub implementations of editDynamicField (see the attached
>> patch).
>
> that +/- thing looks strange, I'll have a look.
yes, it does. Actually it looks strange either way, but I think I just
understood the idea. The dynamically added fields are supposed to be at
index 0,1,... of the vector _dynFieldsV and the code assumed that
_localType.addDescription returns an index >= Inherited::NextFieldId so
the "-" was used to shift that index. But _localType does not know about
the inherited fields and thus returns indices starting from 0 (or maybe
1 -- didn't check that part).
So maybe the real problem is that the DynamicAttachment needs two type
objects (one per type like any other fc and the per instance one) where
the per instance one "extends" the per type one. What would we the best
way to achieve that ?
Carsten
PS: sorry for being so verbose, but writing these things down seems to
help me think about them ;)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier.
Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Opensg-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users
