>
> Think of 'Super' as opening a Russian Doll. When you call a
> given method,
> it's at the current outermost level. When you use Super you
> remove a layer
> and work with what is nested inside.
> I don't know if that helps or not.
>
> I don't know lingo, but Flash behaves more or less a
On 3/19/07, Andy Herrman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Oh, I don't even think of 'super' as any kind of identifier/variable.
I think of it the same way I think of '.', '[]' or even '->' (in C),
in that I think of it as an operator used to access something, not as
a reference. 'super.' is just the w
- Original Message -
From: "Danny Kodicek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 4:59 PM
Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Super and this
> I was simply suggesting that using the right words would make
things clearer. Danny
Oh, I don't even think of 'super' as any kind of identifier/variable.
I think of it the same way I think of '.', '[]' or even '->' (in C),
in that I think of it as an operator used to access something, not as
a reference. 'super.' is just the way to access the parent
implementation of a function,
> I was simply suggesting that using the right words would make
> things clearer. Danny is right in a sense.
> Ron
>
> Karina Steffens wrote:
> > Danny, I think what Ron means is, you don't instantiate the class
> > _and_ the super class, as you would with Director.
> >
> > As you know (and for
t; which I think is pretty cool, a bit like inheritance via composition.
>
> Actually if you go back to the metaphor, the Chrysler PT Cruiser in Director
> would come with a little Chrysler Neon sitting inside it ;)
>
> Karina
>
>
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Dann
Cruiser in Director
would come with a little Chrysler Neon sitting inside it ;)
Karina
-Original Message-
From: Danny Kodicek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: 19 March 2007 09:39
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Super and t
Isn't that what 'instantiate' means? By 'instantiate' I mean 'make an
instance of'.
Correct.
Instantiate an instance... now that makes no sense.
Dave -
Head Developer
www.blurredistinction.com
Adobe Community Expert
http://www.adobe.com/communities/experts/
__
tor way
is a lot more flexible - you can generate and swap ancestors on the fly,
which I think is pretty cool, a bit like inheritance via composition.
Actually if you go back to the metaphor, the Chrysler PT Cruiser in Director
would come with a little Chrysler Neon sitting inside it ;)
Karina
>
; From: Danny Kodicek [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 19 March 2007 09:39
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
> Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Super and this
>
> > Just to make your life simpler.
> > You do not instantiate a class; you instantiate an
> >
- Original Message -
From: "Danny Kodicek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>;
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 9:38 AM
Subject: RE: [Flashcoders] Super and this
> Just to make your life simpler.
You do not instantiate a class; you instantiate an
ins
> Just to make your life simpler.
> You do not instantiate a class; you instantiate an
> instance(object) of a class.
Isn't that what 'instantiate' means? By 'instantiate' I mean 'make an
instance of'.
Danny
___
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
To
Just to make your life simpler.
You do not instantiate a class; you instantiate an instance(object) of
a class. A class is only a definition and is stored in Flash as a
definition which can be instantiated as many times as required. The
definition refers to the definitions of the classes that
> So, when you instantiate a class that extends other classes,
> there is only one actual object that's created. So `this`
> would always return the same object, whether in code written
> in A or in B.
Makes sense. A much better system than Lingo, which takes a bit of messing
with to make it
> Yes.
LOL - long question, short answer, thanks.
Danny
___
Flashcoders@chattyfig.figleaf.com
To change your subscription options or search the archive:
http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders
Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software
Pr
My question: will the 'this' parameter refer to the same object in the
superclass as it does in object A?
Yes
- Original Message -
From: "Danny Kodicek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Flashcoders mailing list'"
Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 2:48 PM
Subject: [Flashcoders] Super and this
So, when you instantiate a class that extends other classes, there is
only one actual object that's created. So `this` would always return
the same object, whether in code written in A or in B.
super is simply used so that you can reference the parent class's
implementation of certain functions
On 3/16/07, Danny Kodicek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just a quick check, as I'm more used to Director's inheritance model than
Flash's!
I have an object A which extends B, which in turn extends MovieClip
Object B has a method 'fGetElementAt' which returns a movieclip
In A, I want to extend this
18 matches
Mail list logo
