Hey Koen, Thank you very much for clarifications! God bless you!
Regards, Dmitriy 2010/4/30 Koen Deforche <[email protected]> > Hey Dmitriy, > > 2010/4/29 Dmitriy Igrishin <[email protected]>: > > Yes, the inheritance is likely to be preferable. But from what class? > > Personally, I think that WContainerWidget in most cases is only an > > implementation detail. > > Therefore, the use of public inheritance to create a new widget if that > > widget "is not" actually container is mistakable from the point of > design. > > So, I thought about public inheritance from WWidget and private > inheritance > > from WContainerWidget. But now I found a method WCompositeWidget:: > > setImplementation(..), which allows to set that WContainerWidget > > is exactly an implementation detail of the composite widget. > > I think that sums up the raison-d'etre of WCompositeWidget ! > > The multiple inheritance option doesn't work since Wt does not use > 'virtual inheritance' to make the resulting diamond structure work as > expected (and diamond structures are not very popular with C++ > veterans possibly because of the lousy support for it in the early > compiler days but also because they make your head explode (certain on > Friday evening)). > > I would recommend to use WCompositeWidget for preventing any > implementation-leakage -- but you only need this for widgets that you > really expect to be heavily reused throughout your project, company, > etc... > > Regards, > koen > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > witty-interest mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ witty-interest mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest
