From: "Daniel L. Taylor" <dtaylor at taylor-design dot com>
Well, that is a good example of playing with dynamite!
I think passing objects across the boundary should be OK, but as for
accessing the properties/methods... Thats very tricky. I think instead,
we should just allow RBScript objects to implement class interfaces
defined in the project.
Looks like there's an RbScript bug to fix here, since you shouldn't be
able
to get yourself into that kind of trouble in the first place.
May I suggest that we *should* be able to "get into that kind of
trouble"?
I agree with the rest of your message.
The RB community strongly seems to have some kind of informal tradition
that unexplained crashes are a design flaw in your code, whether that's
RB itself or plugins.
I actually find that the result of this tradition, is that I am allowed
to be a more productive developer, not having to hunt down silly
crashes which were because I did something stupid.
I think there must be a solution that pleases everyone.
What about this. A property of "RBScript.AllowedUtilityClasses as
string" ? That would give us most of what we need.
For example. RBScript.AllowedUtilityClasses = "MyClassInterface", this
would allow the RBScript to define classes which adhered to the class
interface passed. Then, the script will either not compile if the class
does not adhere, or we can now inter communicate nicely.
The rest of what we'd miss, would come from global methods.
--
Theodore H. Smith - www.elfdata.com/plugin/ - www.elfdata.com/forum/
ElfData: Industrial strength string processing, made easy.
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>
Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
|