Hi,
On which side would you like to use Reflection ?
On client-side ? I don't know if qooxdoo have reflection capabilities, but
if it has, well, why not =)
Anyway, if we use Reflection, this is for some means, and these means then
should be abstracted to make working classes cleaner (just things needed by
abstraction to make things work).
That said, if we have for some thing to be done, an abstract class and then
for each cases of the abstract thing some special classes (or not), then we
would have the generality thing done by abstract (using data only) and for
special cases the behavior redefined by the extending class (which would use
the given data of course- abstract-).
Anyway, this point out that special things must be defined : the class must
exists.
So, at some point, if we want to use reflection (if exists), then datas must
include class name if they need special treatment, or something like a
marker to say "No I'm not a generic data, handle me this way" > this is
somewhat Strategy pattern ?
At least, I prefer the "generate js code on server-side" solution. If it's
during build process, sounds better.
To be clear : on production, I would not use dynamically generated
components (for both client and server side) because....people isn't a
programmer =)
If we mean to use this to help us generate production code, and modify them
somewhat later, then this sounds good to me =)
Anyway, there are other means to do this : openArchitectureWare (meta
programming).
Well, this is my point of view. Not to be THE truth =)
Regards
2008/2/7, Philippe Poulard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
> Stéphane ERARD a écrit :
> > Hi,
> >
> > I just would like to say my thoughts:
> > on large, big applications (supposing qooxdoo is meant to build strong,
> > big applications),
> > we developers need to be able to specialize anything needed when needed.
>
> ...for the most demanding :)
>
> > If we build things accordingly to datas, and only datas, in production I
> > believe this is bad idea because we can't specialize, or we would need a
> > switch statement somewhere in the code to manage special cases.
>
> So far, I agree
>
> Uh !
> > I prefer having lot of classes but this would allow me to specialize
> > when needed. Just having to extend some class somewhere, then it is
> > 'static' in some way (behavior is written in a class, even if abstract).
>
> What about 'reflection' capabilities (that brings dynamicity) ?
>
> > This is bacic usage of abstraction in oo I believe.
> >
> > Hope I'm clear enought.
> >
> > What do you think of this ?
>
> --
> Cordialement,
>
> ///
> (. .)
> --------ooO--(_)--Ooo--------
> | Philippe Poulard |
> -----------------------------
> http://reflex.gforge.inria.fr/
> Have the RefleX !
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
> Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
> http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
> _______________________________________________
> qooxdoo-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
>
--
Before Printing, Think about Your Environmental Responsibility!
Avant d'Imprimer, Pensez à Votre Responsabilitée Environnementale!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
qooxdoo-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
