On Apr 19, 2006, at 9:57 AM, Asher Dunn wrote:
On Apr 19, 2006, at 11:43 AM, Norman Palardy wrote:
Constants and shared methods and properties are class members,
not instance members. I now understand that instance scope works
intentionally, but I do not think it should.
Why not ?
Every instance is a member of that class and shares those properties.
The instance version of looking up the property is just a "short
hand" to getting at the class' shared property.
I would prefer to think of it as the class owning the property, not
each instance sharing the same property. Allowing instance syntax
means you never know whether instance.someProp is a shared property
or an instance property (without looking it up or remembering). It
just makes things less clear, IMO.
It's both.
The property could be an instance one or a class one.
Kind of like how you dont know if a property is a getter/setter pair
or not and really you don't or shouldn't care (at least from a
functionality point of view)
The property is part of the instance regardless of whether it is per
instance or not
And, if you refer to it using the instance syntax you can change the
implementation (make it class based) without having to change piles
of code for something that really should not be relevant.
I kind of like that it is this way
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
