Not surprisingly, the very subtle point raised by
the original poster has been misunderstood.
The OP complained that this
int x = (myclass.myproperty = y);
should behave like this
// Semantic A
myclass.myproperty = y;
int x = myclass.property;
rather than this
// Semantic B
myclass.myproperty = y;
int x = y;
The subtle point is that myclass.myproperty
does not necessarily evaluate to y.
To repeat the OP's example, a property can
be defined like this
private int _number;
public int number {
set { _number = value * 2; }
get { return _number; }
}
I think chained assignment should have
Semantic B, for the following reasons:
* A well designed property should give
the same result for both semantics
* Semantic A is not possible for a
write only property.
* Semantic A is really confusing. e.g.,
var1.myproperty = var2.myproperty = y;
who would have thought that var1.myproperty
is different from var2.myproperty ?!
hand
Nor Jaidi Tuah
PRIVILEGED/CONFIDENTIAL information may be contained in this message. If you
are neither the addressee (intended recipient) nor an authorised recipient of
the addressee, and have received this message in error, please destroy this
message (including attachments) and notify the sender immediately. STRICT
PROHIBITION: This message, whether in part or in whole, should not be reviewed,
retained, copied, reused, disclosed, distributed or used for any purpose
whatsoever. Such unauthorised use may be unlawful and may contain material
protected by the Official Secrets Act (Cap 153) of the Laws of Brunei
Darussalam. DISCLAIMER: We/This Department/The Government of Brunei Darussalam,
accept[s] no responsibility for loss or damage arising from the use of this
message in any manner whatsoever. Our messages are checked for viruses but we
do not accept liability for any viruses which may be transmitted in or with
this message.
_______________________________________________
vala-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/vala-list
