Thanks to all who answered to my question.
I pretty quickly discovered by myself that setAprop was the solution.
To the question of Tom, whether I use it in a behaviour or a parent script:
Parent script is the answer. And to Irv's concern that my approach would
break encapsulation, I am not
I would say that the way that you are trying to set these properties
violates very basic OOP principles. The principle of encapsulation
is based on the idea that the only thing you can know about an object
is the API (the Application Program Interface) that the object has.
This is the list of
Hi List,
in an object, I can easily set a property like this
me.pSomething = 1
But what, if I have the name of the property in a variable? Like
myProp = symbol(pSomething)
Writing
me[myProp] = 1
doesn't work,
set myProp of me to 1
doesn't work either.
Any solution?
Thanks in advance!
Hi Michael,
But what, if I have the name of the property in a variable?
Does the following work?
me.setAProp(myProp, some value)
--
Cole
[To remove yourself from this list, or to change to digest mode, go to
http://www.penworks.com/lingo-l.cgi To post messages to the list, email
I believe that Jeff's suggestiong of using getAProp and setAProp will
work. However, by doing this you are really breaking encapsulation.
That is, you are allowing code outside of an object to reference
property variables inside the object directly.
A different approach is to use a case
