[flexcoders] Re: Advanced(?) Actionscript question

2008-04-28 Thread Bjorn Schultheiss 
I believe you can do this

class Foo
{
  var bar:Function;
}


//somewhere outside the class

function myfunction():void {trace('hi')};

var foo:Foo = new Foo;
foo.bar = myfunction;


if you have 
class Foo
{
  function bar():void {}
}

then you must override.

But you have more flexibility if Foo is defined as a Dynamic Class..



--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Josh McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Thanks for that info.
 
 I'm not really sure about how things work internally, besides some vague
 references to traits the documentation doesn't help too much - can you
 redefine member methods on a particular instance?
 
 What I mean is this:
 
 var foo : Foo = new Foo();
 foo.bar(); // Does something
 foo.bar = function() : void { doOtherStuff() };
 foo.bar(); // Does something else
 
 -J
 
 On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Gordon Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
 I think there is additional overhead in calling an anonymous
function
  (i.e., your 'var foo:Function = ' case).
 
 
 
  And I don't think that the rules for what 'this' is, when the function
  executes, are the same.
 
 
 
  Gordon Smith
 
  Adobe Flex SDK Team
 
 
   --
 
  *From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On
  Behalf Of *Josh McDonald
  *Sent:* Monday, April 28, 2008 4:58 PM
  *To:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
  *Subject:* Re: [flexcoders] Advanced(?) Actionscript question
 
 
 
  Of course you're right, my syntax was dodgey. I meant:
 
  var foo : Function = function():* {};
 
  But besides that, my questions still stand ;-)
 
  -J
 
  On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Bjorn Schultheiss 
  [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  In the second version your initializing foo as an object.
 
 
 
  I'm pretty certain you cant do,
 
  var foo:Function = {trace('foo')}
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  On 29/04/2008, at 9:37 AM, Josh McDonald wrote:
 
 Guys,
 
  what's the difference (if it exists) between:
 
  public function foo() : * {}
 
  and:
 
  public var foo : Function = {};
 
  Does it exist? I assume you can call Bar.foo() in both cases, and foo
  shows up as a variable in describeType() in the second instance?
Are there
  other details I'm not aware of?
 
  Cheers,
 
  -J
 
  --
  Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for
thee.
 
  :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
  :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
 
 
 
 
 
  --
  Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for
thee.
 
  :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
  :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
   
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for
thee.
 
 :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
 :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [flexcoders] Re: Advanced(?) Actionscript question

2008-04-28 Thread Josh McDonald 
Of course, I always forger about the dynamic keyword :)

On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Bjorn Schultheiss 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

   I believe you can do this

 class Foo
 {
 var bar:Function;
 }

 //somewhere outside the class

 function myfunction():void {trace('hi')};


 var foo:Foo = new Foo;
 foo.bar = myfunction;

 if you have
 class Foo
 {
 function bar():void {}
 }

 then you must override.

 But you have more flexibility if Foo is defined as a Dynamic Class..

 --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com, Josh
 McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
  Thanks for that info.
 
  I'm not really sure about how things work internally, besides some vague
  references to traits the documentation doesn't help too much - can you
  redefine member methods on a particular instance?
 
  What I mean is this:
 
  var foo : Foo = new Foo();
  foo.bar(); // Does something
  foo.bar = function() : void { doOtherStuff() };
  foo.bar(); // Does something else
 
  -J
 
  On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Gordon Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
   I think there is additional overhead in calling an anonymous
 function
   (i.e., your 'var foo:Function = ' case).
  
  
  
   And I don't think that the rules for what 'this' is, when the function
   executes, are the same.
  
  
  
   Gordon Smith
  
   Adobe Flex SDK Team
  
  
   --
  
   *From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
 [mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com] *On
   Behalf Of *Josh McDonald
   *Sent:* Monday, April 28, 2008 4:58 PM
   *To:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
   *Subject:* Re: [flexcoders] Advanced(?) Actionscript question
  
  
  
   Of course you're right, my syntax was dodgey. I meant:
  
   var foo : Function = function():* {};
  
   But besides that, my questions still stand ;-)
  
   -J
  
   On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Bjorn Schultheiss 
   [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  
   In the second version your initializing foo as an object.
  
  
  
   I'm pretty certain you cant do,
  
   var foo:Function = {trace('foo')}
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
   On 29/04/2008, at 9:37 AM, Josh McDonald wrote:
  
   Guys,
  
   what's the difference (if it exists) between:
  
   public function foo() : * {}
  
   and:
  
   public var foo : Function = {};
  
   Does it exist? I assume you can call Bar.foo() in both cases, and foo
   shows up as a variable in describeType() in the second instance?
 Are there
   other details I'm not aware of?
  
   Cheers,
  
   -J
  
   --
   Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for
 thee.
  
   :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
   :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
  
  
  
  
  
   --
   Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for
 thee.
  
   :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
   :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  
  
  
 
 
 
  --
  Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for
 thee.
 
  :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
  :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 

  




-- 
Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee.

:: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
:: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[flexcoders] Re: Advanced(?) Actionscript question

2008-04-28 Thread Bjorn Schultheiss 
Check this out..

Mixins, How to.
http://flexonrails.net/?p=79


--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, Josh McDonald [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Of course, I always forger about the dynamic keyword :)
 
 On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Bjorn Schultheiss 
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 
I believe you can do this
 
  class Foo
  {
  var bar:Function;
  }
 
  //somewhere outside the class
 
  function myfunction():void {trace('hi')};
 
 
  var foo:Foo = new Foo;
  foo.bar = myfunction;
 
  if you have
  class Foo
  {
  function bar():void {}
  }
 
  then you must override.
 
  But you have more flexibility if Foo is defined as a Dynamic Class..
 
  --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com,
Josh
  McDonald dznuts@ wrote:
  
   Thanks for that info.
  
   I'm not really sure about how things work internally, besides
some vague
   references to traits the documentation doesn't help too much -
can you
   redefine member methods on a particular instance?
  
   What I mean is this:
  
   var foo : Foo = new Foo();
   foo.bar(); // Does something
   foo.bar = function() : void { doOtherStuff() };
   foo.bar(); // Does something else
  
   -J
  
   On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 10:14 AM, Gordon Smith gosmith@ wrote:
  
I think there is additional overhead in calling an anonymous
  function
(i.e., your 'var foo:Function = ' case).
   
   
   
And I don't think that the rules for what 'this' is, when the
function
executes, are the same.
   
   
   
Gordon Smith
   
Adobe Flex SDK Team
   
   
--
   
*From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
  [mailto:flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com] *On
Behalf Of *Josh McDonald
*Sent:* Monday, April 28, 2008 4:58 PM
*To:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com flexcoders%40yahoogroups.com
*Subject:* Re: [flexcoders] Advanced(?) Actionscript question
   
   
   
Of course you're right, my syntax was dodgey. I meant:
   
var foo : Function = function():* {};
   
But besides that, my questions still stand ;-)
   
-J
   
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Bjorn Schultheiss 
bjorn.mailinglists@ wrote:
   
In the second version your initializing foo as an object.
   
   
   
I'm pretty certain you cant do,
   
var foo:Function = {trace('foo')}
   
   
   
   
   
   
   
On 29/04/2008, at 9:37 AM, Josh McDonald wrote:
   
Guys,
   
what's the difference (if it exists) between:
   
public function foo() : * {}
   
and:
   
public var foo : Function = {};
   
Does it exist? I assume you can call Bar.foo() in both cases,
and foo
shows up as a variable in describeType() in the second instance?
  Are there
other details I'm not aware of?
   
Cheers,
   
-J
   
--
Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for
  thee.
   
:: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
:: 0437 221 380 :: josh@
   
   
   
   
   
   
--
Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for
  thee.
   
:: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
:: 0437 221 380 :: josh@
   
   
   
  
  
  
   --
   Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for
  thee.
  
   :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
   :: 0437 221 380 :: josh@
  
 
   
 
 
 
 
 -- 
 Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for
thee.
 
 :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald
 :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]