Re: [Pyobjc-dev] posing

[<bb...@ma...>]

(Thinking out loud)

Scratch that.    I see what is going on.

The pyobj_ivar contains a reference to the Python instance that 
effectively provides the Python side of the implementation of the 
current class;  not just a binding to the class, but also to the 
instance on the python side.

OK.

That makes life a bit more difficult, but I *really* want posing to 
work and, afaict, that instance variable is the only thing that is 
holding this back.

But this also raises a question regarding the eventual implementation 
of categories.  Sort of.   With Categories, one needs to add Python 
implemented methods to an already existing class.

Rephrase:  Categories and posing are effectively the same problem:   
they both imply that a class will preexist and that the category (or 
posing class) will not add any instance variables within its 
declaration.

Huh....

b.bum

On Sunday, Jan 19, 2003, at 15:22 US/Eastern, bb...@ma... wrote:
> On Saturday, Jan 18, 2003, at 02:23 US/Eastern, Ronald Oussoren wrote:
>> A -(PyObject*)__pyobjc_pythonImplementation is probably more usefull 
>> in the long run (return NULL in NSObject, the equivalent of the 
>> current self.__pyobjc_objc__ in mixed classes and the bridged python 
>> object in OC_PythonObject and friends)
> Right.
>
> Is there any per-instance significance to the additional instance var? 
>  I'm thinking not, but I'm not 100% sure.