realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: OOP

To: REALbasic NUG <realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Subject: Re: OOP
From: Steve Roy <sroy at mac dot com>
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2005 19:26:08 -0500
Delivered-to: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
References: <33cbfa100510311302v39a9d58bsf64f0785e76745d7 at mail dot gmail dot com> <p06230922bf8c528d55e7 at [192 dot 168 dot 1 dot 100]>
maclists at additional dot com wrote:

I agree with Steve that packages would be a great addition to Rb, especially if you could have an external package (the same way you can have an external class right now).

But... I also agree with Lars that the folder mechanism is best left as an organizational tool.

It's really the concept of namespaces versus friend classes that we are discussing. RB doesn't have namespaces (or packages) and the practice of prepending classes with one or two letters comes from that attempt to not step on each other's toes since everything is visible to everyone.

I'm not much familiar with friends (is that an oxymoron?) for not having used them much if it all in my C++ projects. Many people call them evil, but I don't know.

However just to be clear, I like that RB is clean and simple, and I like not to have to import namespaces or worry about scope and whatnot. Sure I could have used "package-private" methods as well as classes on a few occasions, but the fact that RB is simple is more important to me than to have such a feature.

Steve

--
Steve Roy <sroy at mac dot com>
<http://homepage.mac.com/sroy>
_______________________________________________
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>

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