Hi Johannes,
On 05/03/2010 09:14 AM, Carsten Neumann wrote:
>
> it is possible that some GraphOps may need to be made aware of these new
> cores. In theory the GraphOps should only do things were they don't need
> to know many types of cores (only the ones they actually operate on),
> but in practice they sometimes have to be aware of the semantics of
> certain cores.
> Unfortunately this means the actual GraphOp needs to be changed as they
> (deliberately IIRC) do not have a callback registration mechanism like
> the Actions.
Yes, that was deliberate. The goal was to make GraphOps simpler to develop than
Actions, which need the flexibility, but that makes them pretty heavy-weight.
Given that the GOs use a factory my approach would be to derive from the GO
that
you need, handle the new classes in the derived one and let the base one handle
the standard classes. I'm not totally sure if that works for all GOs, we might
have to rearrange things a little to simplify that, but that was the idea. Once
you have that you can override the GO factory so that your new GO is used
instead of the old one.
Yours
Dirk
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Opensg-users mailing list
Opensg-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-users
