From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Troy Gilbert
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 11:09 AM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] star (*) data type vs. Object
Hmm... don't dictionaries and array effectively return something of type
* ?
In th
m.
- Gordon
From: Gordon Smith
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:15 PM
To: 'flexcoders@yahoogroups.com'
Subject: RE: [flexcoders] star (*) data type vs. Object
> don't dictionaries and array effectively return something of type * ?
Yes. I tried
var a:Array = [ undefined ];
I'm glad my innocent question has sparked such a fascinating discussion.
I have to admit, from a practical standpoint, it makes it simpler that
Objects can no longer be set to undefined. In AS2, to prevent possible bugs
caused by undefined/null ambiguity, I used to explicitly set my member
varia
this but, in general, the player folks recommend
using statically type code when it's possible to do so.
- Gordon
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Troy Gilbert
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2007 11:09 AM
To: flexcoders@yah
Hmm... don't dictionaries and array effectively return something of type * ?
In the case of pop(), etc., it wouldn't make sense for the array to return *
because that would mean it _could_ return the value of undefined, which
doesn't make sense. As Gordon points out, Object is stronger in that it
good post and i agree, dictionaries and arrays should return *
On 5/23/07, Derek Vadneau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"* is just like Object"
I couldn't disagree more.
I really dislike that Object is referred to in the docs about *. There is
an implication there that they are similar when the
rs@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Derek Vadneau
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 9:07 AM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] star (*) data type vs. Object
It's not about getting around compile-time checking, which is what you'd
be doing with Objec
om]
> On
> Behalf Of Derek Vadneau
> Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:11 AM
> To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [flexcoders] star (*) data type vs. Object
>
>
> "* is just like Object"
>
> I couldn't disagree more.
>
> I really dislike
nt: Wednesday, May 23, 2007 11:11 AM
To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] star (*) data type vs. Object
"* is just like Object"
I couldn't disagree more.
I really dislike that Object is referred to in the docs about *. There
is an implication there that they a
oogroups.com
Subject: Re: [flexcoders] star (*) data type vs. Object
"* is just like Object"
I couldn't disagree more.
I really dislike that Object is referred to in the docs about *. There
is an implication there that they are similar when they really aren't.
This is a so
"* is just like Object"
I couldn't disagree more.
I really dislike that Object is referred to in the docs about *. There is an
implication there that they are similar when they really aren't.
This is a sore spot for me everytime I use Array.pop() and Array.shift() in
the Flash IDE. Both of thos
See:
http://livedocs.adobe.com/flex/2/langref/specialTypes.html#*
The type * is just like Object but it can also store values that are
undefined. Object can only store null.
It's useful to determine whether a dynamic property actually exists on a
type and just happens to be null, or whether it
12 matches
Mail list logo
