I think you're right Steve. I have asked myself the same question in
the past and ended up using bindProperty… When you say function set
():void or function get ():Something you're really telling the method
to masquerade as a property, so it makes sense that you can treat it
as such. I have used BindingUtils.bindProperty to bind a setter
method and it seems to work.
Cheers,
Lach
On 04/12/2006, at 4:31 PM, Steve Hindle wrote:
Sorry for reply to myself - but this is driving me _nuts_! I can't
find an example of bindSetter with a 'real' accessor function with
either yahoo or google. And the example on the 'bindUtils' page at
adobe.com (stuck in the comments at the bottom) - doesn't bind to a
'function set blah'... (isn't that the _required_ to consider a
funciton/method a 'setter' ??) It just binds to a 'normal' function.
Anyway, I'm starting to think that 'bindSetter' is really a poorly
named 'bindFunction' and that _all_ properties - var OR accessor based
should be using bindProperty.
Can someone confirm/refute this and save my sanity please!
Thanks
