Another good option would be to say ICloseable extends IUIComponent
b/c IUIComponent is a Flex interface defined for you that has most of
what you want.
-Ryan
--- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "b_alen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I wouldn't suggest you uptype to an IClosable interface. By doing so,
> you loose access to all the members of the UIComponent. And having
> access to super class's members is why you do inheritance in the first
> place.
>
> say:
>
> class Sub extends UIComponent implements IClosable
>
> var sub1:IClosable = new Sub();
> sub1.id; // You get an error here
> sub1.isClosed; // this works
>
> var sub2:UIComponent = new Sub();
> sub2.id; // this works
> sub2.isClosed; // You get an error here
>
>
> I suggest you create a subclass of UIComponent, say AbstractUIComp*,
> which will by default have all the members of UIComponent, plus all
> the new members you want to add on your own (isClosed). Then you just
> make more subclasses of the AbstractUIComp and you can safely uptype
> them later to AbstractUIComp to get the polymorphism working.
>
> say:
>
> class AbstractUIComp extends UIComponent
> class Sub extends AbstractUIComp
>
> var sub:AbstractUIComp = new Sub();
> sub.id; // this works
> sub.isClosed; // this works
>
>
> * Unfortunately Abstract classes and members are not supported by AS3,
> so you have to just "know" that it is an Abstract class (class that
> you don't instantiate, you just use it for subclassing it). It would
> also be a bit more elegant if you would implement IClosable for the
> AbstractUIComp and all of it's classes.
>
> Cheers
>
>
> --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "dsds99" <dsds99@> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks, your solution worked.
> >
> > If I think about it, I'm puzzled. Just like UIComponent, the IClosable
> > interface doesn't have the isClosed property either. So when I cast it
> > that interface, it should fail but it doesn't.
> >
> > If that's how interfaces work. Then casting it as IUIComponent
> > interface should have worked too.
> >
> > --- In flexcoders@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Krotscheck" <mkrotscheck@>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > UIComponent doesn't have a property called isClosed, therefore your
> > > attempt to access that property on an instance cast to UIComponent
> will
> > > throw an error. What you need to do is have each class implement an
> > > interface called IClosable or something along those lines, and
cast to
> > > that.
> > >
> > > public function checkDoor(c:IClosable):Boolean
> > > {
> > > return c.isClosed;
> > > }
> > >
> > >
> > > Michael Krotscheck
> > >
> > > Senior Developer
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > RESOURCE INTERACTIVE
> > >
> > > <http://www.resource.com/> www.resource.com
> <http://www.resource.com/>
> > >
> > > mkrotscheck@ <mailto:mkrotscheck@>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > >
> > > From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > > Behalf Of dsds99
> > > Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2008 4:54 PM
> > > To: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com
> > > Subject: [flexcoders] Polymorphism....?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I have 2 unrelated classes that extend UIComponent ultimately..;)
> > > and each class implements a boolean property called "isClosed"
> > >
> > > Passing these classes into the function as untyped.
> > >
> > > If I don't cast, it works. Trying to understand why it doesn't work
> > > this way.
> > >
> > > A compile time error occurs in the if statement. But isn't this
where
> > > polymorphism kicks in even though I am casting it to a higher
class in
> > > the chain.
> > >
> > > public function checkDoor(c:*):void{
> > > if((c is UIComponent).isClosed == true){
> > > trace("opened");
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > We support privacy and confidentiality. Please delete this email
if it
> > > was received in error.
> > >
> > > What's new ::
> > > Capitalize on the social web | The Open Brand, a new book by Kelly
> > > Mooney and Dr. Nita Rollins, available March 2008 |
> www.theopenbrand.com
> > >
> >
>
