realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: known limitations of REALbasic?

To: REALbasic NUG <realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Subject: Re: known limitations of REALbasic?
From: Asher Dunn <asher at fireyesoftware dot com>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 17:37:22 -0400
Delivered-to: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
References: <20060425201051 dot A896E121B35B at lists dot realsoftware dot com> <D3BB1BA9-40CF-41F7-BA6A-8631D2EB6D80 at elfdata dot com> <E8F45574-0CE8-4DD3-BE6A-51B80531725B at great-white-software dot com>

On Apr 25, 2006, at 5:14 PM, Norman Palardy wrote:

[init] isn't equivalent to new.
Init is like RB's constructor (it can be called at any time)

[alloc] is equivalent to new.

RB's new is more like [alloc[ init ]]

Yeah, I suppose so. But since +alloc creates the object and -init sets up state, I equated +alloc to 'new' an -init to a constructor() function. Perhaps it wasn't a good comparison.

-- Asher

_______________________________________________
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>