From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2007-08-06 13:18:59
|
Feature Requests item #1098932, was opened at 2005-01-09 09:04 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by bigrixx You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: None Group: None Status: Open Resolution: None Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) >Assigned to: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Summary: Improve syntax for defining attribute methods. Initial Comment: ooRexx has a handy syntax for exposing an object internal variable as getter/setter accessor methods using ::method foo attribute however, because of the way attributes are used, people have a hard time thinking of them as "methods". They are properties, not methods. So it would be nice if the alternative syntax ::attribute foo were supported. There are still some other problems here. For examply, there's currently no means for defining read-only properties. To do that, you need to drop down and define an actual method for the property: ::method foo expose foo return foo It would be nice to be able to code ::attribute foo readonly Also, if setter logic requires some sort of validation, then it become necessary to code both the setter and getter methods. Additionally, the setter method gets exposed to another bit of ugliness on the ::method statement, the requirement to quote (and uppercase) the method name to include the "=" ::method "FOO=" C## and some versions of Javascript have a nice model for something like this, allowing the property to be defined, along with the getter/setter methods in place. For example ooRexx could do something like this. ::attribute foo ::set expose foo use arg new if datatype(.....) ::get expose foo ..... Either ::get or ::set can be optional. If not specified, it will default to the automatically generated method. Question: Should ::get ::set methods implicitly expose the instance variable of the same name? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2007-08-07 10:10:12
|
Feature Requests item #1098932, was opened at 2005-01-09 09:04 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by bigrixx You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. >Category: Interpreter >Group: Next Release >Status: Pending >Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Assigned to: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Summary: Improve syntax for defining attribute methods. Initial Comment: ooRexx has a handy syntax for exposing an object internal variable as getter/setter accessor methods using ::method foo attribute however, because of the way attributes are used, people have a hard time thinking of them as "methods". They are properties, not methods. So it would be nice if the alternative syntax ::attribute foo were supported. There are still some other problems here. For examply, there's currently no means for defining read-only properties. To do that, you need to drop down and define an actual method for the property: ::method foo expose foo return foo It would be nice to be able to code ::attribute foo readonly Also, if setter logic requires some sort of validation, then it become necessary to code both the setter and getter methods. Additionally, the setter method gets exposed to another bit of ugliness on the ::method statement, the requirement to quote (and uppercase) the method name to include the "=" ::method "FOO=" C## and some versions of Javascript have a nice model for something like this, allowing the property to be defined, along with the getter/setter methods in place. For example ooRexx could do something like this. ::attribute foo ::set expose foo use arg new if datatype(.....) ::get expose foo ..... Either ::get or ::set can be optional. If not specified, it will default to the automatically generated method. Question: Should ::get ::set methods implicitly expose the instance variable of the same name? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2007-09-22 05:58:10
|
Feature Requests item #1098932, was opened at 2005-01-09 14:04 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by sahananda You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Interpreter Group: Next Release Status: Pending Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Assigned to: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Summary: Improve syntax for defining attribute methods. Initial Comment: ooRexx has a handy syntax for exposing an object internal variable as getter/setter accessor methods using ::method foo attribute however, because of the way attributes are used, people have a hard time thinking of them as "methods". They are properties, not methods. So it would be nice if the alternative syntax ::attribute foo were supported. There are still some other problems here. For examply, there's currently no means for defining read-only properties. To do that, you need to drop down and define an actual method for the property: ::method foo expose foo return foo It would be nice to be able to code ::attribute foo readonly Also, if setter logic requires some sort of validation, then it become necessary to code both the setter and getter methods. Additionally, the setter method gets exposed to another bit of ugliness on the ::method statement, the requirement to quote (and uppercase) the method name to include the "=" ::method "FOO=" C## and some versions of Javascript have a nice model for something like this, allowing the property to be defined, along with the getter/setter methods in place. For example ooRexx could do something like this. ::attribute foo ::set expose foo use arg new if datatype(.....) ::get expose foo ..... Either ::get or ::set can be optional. If not specified, it will default to the automatically generated method. Question: Should ::get ::set methods implicitly expose the instance variable of the same name? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jon Wolfers (sahananda) Date: 2007-09-22 05:58 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=667060 Originator: NO Hi Rick, While you're working in this area, one thing that I would find handy would be to be able to declare several attributes in one single directive. For instance, I have an object with 43 properties, I have 43 directives like such: ::method error Attribute -- Database access error ::method baseRRP Attribute -- The current w:e baseprice ::method bomQty Attribute -- The number of this child in a bom parent ::method bomsComplete Attribute -- The number of complete parents in stock ::method bomSpares Attribute -- Boolean - incomplete children exist ::method category Attribute -- Department Code ' '|[A-Z] ::method categoryName Attribute -- Text Associated with Category ::method code Attribute -- Product code and so on. What would be nice would be able to declare them in a single directive like this ::Attribute (error, baseRRP, bomQty, bomsComplete, bomSpares, category, categoryName, code) [readonly] ::get -- if this is specified it should apply to all the Attributes created by the above directive ::set -- if this is specified it should apply to all the Attributes created by the above directive What do you think? Jon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2007-10-03 12:35:49
|
Feature Requests item #1098932, was opened at 2005-01-09 09:04 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by bigrixx You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Interpreter >Group: v3.2.0 >Status: Open Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Assigned to: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Summary: Improve syntax for defining attribute methods. Initial Comment: ooRexx has a handy syntax for exposing an object internal variable as getter/setter accessor methods using ::method foo attribute however, because of the way attributes are used, people have a hard time thinking of them as "methods". They are properties, not methods. So it would be nice if the alternative syntax ::attribute foo were supported. There are still some other problems here. For examply, there's currently no means for defining read-only properties. To do that, you need to drop down and define an actual method for the property: ::method foo expose foo return foo It would be nice to be able to code ::attribute foo readonly Also, if setter logic requires some sort of validation, then it become necessary to code both the setter and getter methods. Additionally, the setter method gets exposed to another bit of ugliness on the ::method statement, the requirement to quote (and uppercase) the method name to include the "=" ::method "FOO=" C## and some versions of Javascript have a nice model for something like this, allowing the property to be defined, along with the getter/setter methods in place. For example ooRexx could do something like this. ::attribute foo ::set expose foo use arg new if datatype(.....) ::get expose foo ..... Either ::get or ::set can be optional. If not specified, it will default to the automatically generated method. Question: Should ::get ::set methods implicitly expose the instance variable of the same name? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jon Wolfers (sahananda) Date: 2007-09-22 01:58 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=667060 Originator: NO Hi Rick, While you're working in this area, one thing that I would find handy would be to be able to declare several attributes in one single directive. For instance, I have an object with 43 properties, I have 43 directives like such: ::method error Attribute -- Database access error ::method baseRRP Attribute -- The current w:e baseprice ::method bomQty Attribute -- The number of this child in a bom parent ::method bomsComplete Attribute -- The number of complete parents in stock ::method bomSpares Attribute -- Boolean - incomplete children exist ::method category Attribute -- Department Code ' '|[A-Z] ::method categoryName Attribute -- Text Associated with Category ::method code Attribute -- Product code and so on. What would be nice would be able to declare them in a single directive like this ::Attribute (error, baseRRP, bomQty, bomsComplete, bomSpares, category, categoryName, code) [readonly] ::get -- if this is specified it should apply to all the Attributes created by the above directive ::set -- if this is specified it should apply to all the Attributes created by the above directive What do you think? Jon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2007-10-03 12:39:15
|
Feature Requests item #1098932, was opened at 2005-01-09 09:04 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by bigrixx You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Interpreter Group: v3.2.0 >Status: Pending Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Assigned to: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Summary: Improve syntax for defining attribute methods. Initial Comment: ooRexx has a handy syntax for exposing an object internal variable as getter/setter accessor methods using ::method foo attribute however, because of the way attributes are used, people have a hard time thinking of them as "methods". They are properties, not methods. So it would be nice if the alternative syntax ::attribute foo were supported. There are still some other problems here. For examply, there's currently no means for defining read-only properties. To do that, you need to drop down and define an actual method for the property: ::method foo expose foo return foo It would be nice to be able to code ::attribute foo readonly Also, if setter logic requires some sort of validation, then it become necessary to code both the setter and getter methods. Additionally, the setter method gets exposed to another bit of ugliness on the ::method statement, the requirement to quote (and uppercase) the method name to include the "=" ::method "FOO=" C## and some versions of Javascript have a nice model for something like this, allowing the property to be defined, along with the getter/setter methods in place. For example ooRexx could do something like this. ::attribute foo ::set expose foo use arg new if datatype(.....) ::get expose foo ..... Either ::get or ::set can be optional. If not specified, it will default to the automatically generated method. Question: Should ::get ::set methods implicitly expose the instance variable of the same name? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jon Wolfers (sahananda) Date: 2007-09-22 01:58 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=667060 Originator: NO Hi Rick, While you're working in this area, one thing that I would find handy would be to be able to declare several attributes in one single directive. For instance, I have an object with 43 properties, I have 43 directives like such: ::method error Attribute -- Database access error ::method baseRRP Attribute -- The current w:e baseprice ::method bomQty Attribute -- The number of this child in a bom parent ::method bomsComplete Attribute -- The number of complete parents in stock ::method bomSpares Attribute -- Boolean - incomplete children exist ::method category Attribute -- Department Code ' '|[A-Z] ::method categoryName Attribute -- Text Associated with Category ::method code Attribute -- Product code and so on. What would be nice would be able to declare them in a single directive like this ::Attribute (error, baseRRP, bomQty, bomsComplete, bomSpares, category, categoryName, code) [readonly] ::get -- if this is specified it should apply to all the Attributes created by the above directive ::set -- if this is specified it should apply to all the Attributes created by the above directive What do you think? Jon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 |
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2007-11-03 15:54:56
|
Feature Requests item #1098932, was opened at 2005-01-09 08:04 Message generated for change (Settings changed) made by wdashley You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Interpreter Group: v3.2.0 >Status: Closed Resolution: Accepted Priority: 5 Private: No Submitted By: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Assigned to: Rick McGuire (bigrixx) Summary: Improve syntax for defining attribute methods. Initial Comment: ooRexx has a handy syntax for exposing an object internal variable as getter/setter accessor methods using ::method foo attribute however, because of the way attributes are used, people have a hard time thinking of them as "methods". They are properties, not methods. So it would be nice if the alternative syntax ::attribute foo were supported. There are still some other problems here. For examply, there's currently no means for defining read-only properties. To do that, you need to drop down and define an actual method for the property: ::method foo expose foo return foo It would be nice to be able to code ::attribute foo readonly Also, if setter logic requires some sort of validation, then it become necessary to code both the setter and getter methods. Additionally, the setter method gets exposed to another bit of ugliness on the ::method statement, the requirement to quote (and uppercase) the method name to include the "=" ::method "FOO=" C## and some versions of Javascript have a nice model for something like this, allowing the property to be defined, along with the getter/setter methods in place. For example ooRexx could do something like this. ::attribute foo ::set expose foo use arg new if datatype(.....) ::get expose foo ..... Either ::get or ::set can be optional. If not specified, it will default to the automatically generated method. Question: Should ::get ::set methods implicitly expose the instance variable of the same name? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Jon Wolfers (sahananda) Date: 2007-09-22 00:58 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=667060 Originator: NO Hi Rick, While you're working in this area, one thing that I would find handy would be to be able to declare several attributes in one single directive. For instance, I have an object with 43 properties, I have 43 directives like such: ::method error Attribute -- Database access error ::method baseRRP Attribute -- The current w:e baseprice ::method bomQty Attribute -- The number of this child in a bom parent ::method bomsComplete Attribute -- The number of complete parents in stock ::method bomSpares Attribute -- Boolean - incomplete children exist ::method category Attribute -- Department Code ' '|[A-Z] ::method categoryName Attribute -- Text Associated with Category ::method code Attribute -- Product code and so on. What would be nice would be able to declare them in a single directive like this ::Attribute (error, baseRRP, bomQty, bomsComplete, bomSpares, category, categoryName, code) [readonly] ::get -- if this is specified it should apply to all the Attributes created by the above directive ::set -- if this is specified it should apply to all the Attributes created by the above directive What do you think? Jon ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=684733&aid=1098932&group_id=119701 |