realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: (one last try) (was Re: Events vs. Methods) (Brady Duga)

To: REALbasic NUG <realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Subject: Re: (one last try) (was Re: Events vs. Methods) (Brady Duga)
From: Norman Palardy <palardyn at shaw dot ca>
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2004 12:29:09 -0600
Delivered-to: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
References: <20040831132124 dot 6ECB741CD9B at lists dot realsoftware dot com> <4B9574AA-FB5B-11D8-BEBC-000A27B1C8AE at elfdata dot com> <FDEED2C9-FB79-11D8-8447-0003931D7A4A at ljug dot com>

On Aug 31, 2004, at 12:17 PM, Brady Duga wrote:


On Aug 31, 2004, at 7:37 AM, Theodore H.Smith wrote:

I would have to subclass the
Timer class, store a reference to the socket, store a reference to the
Timer in the socket (oops, circular reference), and put code into the
action event of the subclass that calls the socket telling it to send
the data.

No. You could hypothetically put it into the window code also. Events can work via classes and window code, so why not event-like methods also? No reason why not.

*Sigh*. There is no window. Never mind, I give up.

I rather liked you last missive in reply to Thomas on this.
It makes sense, and makes SELF more consistent than it currently is.

If a class is NOT contained in another class SELF should not be a synonym for ME. It should be disallowed entirely. It would make sense given the way SELF behaves when a control IS on a window.

_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives of this list here:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>