Re: [Dynapi-Dev] inheritance crusade / SuperClass stuff

[Scott A. L. <sc...@sc...>]

I think it's a matter of personal preference at this point.  There
doesn't seem to be a consensus on what the 'correct' model should be, so
maybe it's best if it's left open for you to choose (or create) an
approach that suits your tastes.

-- 
scott andrew lepera
-----------------------------------
web stuff:     www.scottandrew.com
music stuff:   www.walkingbirds.com


Barre Bizon wrote:
> 
> Hmm.. but how about wanting widgets to fully extend
> Dynlayer.. i.e. supporting exactly the same initialization
> as Dynlayer has without writing the code over again.
> 
> Do you not think that a construct() method would be a good
> idea? As per my previous posts...
> It wouldn't alter anything in essence.. nor complicate
> anything. Just how the Dynlayer is initialized, allowing
> widgets to (easily) do a general DynLayer initialization.
> Apart from widget specific initialization...
> 
> / Bart
> 
> > I absolutely agree. Things are already complicated
> enought and I don't want to add one single line of code
> there.
> >
> >
> > Dan Steinman wrote:
> >
> > > It is both mine and Pascal's opinion that no special
> inheritance system is needed for DynAPI.  Just make careful
> attention, and structure using basic prototypes and you can
> do everything (except doing multiple inheritance).  Don't
> overwrite variables, and you don't even necessarily need to
> overwrite methods, and everything works perfectly.  The
> most simplistic solution is often the best, and I believe
> that is the case here.
> > >
> > > Dan
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Dynapi-Dev mailing list
> > Dyn...@li...
> > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/dynapi-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Dynapi-Dev mailing list
> Dyn...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/dynapi-dev