On the plus side, I'm glad you tried, as weak references stuff will come in handy, and I only noticed it as a feature of Dictionary when I double-checked that it wasn't final just now.
More importantly, since there appears to be voodoo that stops you from subclassing it, should it be counted as a bug that it's *not* final? -J On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 3:35 PM, Alex Harui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I hadn't heard of anyone doing it before so it was possible there was a > bug in there somewhere, and it didn't seem necessary as you ended up anyway. > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On > Behalf Of *Mayur Bais > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 13, 2008 10:04 PM > *To:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com > *Subject:* Re: [flexcoders] error while extending dictionary error .. > > > > :) :) sure ...there is nothing that I could not do without extending > dictionary... > with singleTon , I wanted to have the only once reference across the > application .. > > I tried once extending it..and ran into a problem..and then solved it by > not sub classing it (directly returning).. > But the curiosity was there in my mind ..hence put up the question here... > > Here is the class which i had tried extending dictionary: (though it did > not worked...) > > package ms.imfusion.model { > > import flash.utils.Dictionary; > import ms.imfusion.Constants; > > public class MemberList extend dictionary > { > > private static var instance:MemberList; // instance of self. > > > > /** > * property memberList of type Dictionary > */ > public var memberList:Dictionary; > > > /** > * constructor > */ > public function MemberList(){ > super(); > } > > > /** > * Returns the reference to self > */ > public static function getInstance():MemberList { > if(instance == null){ > instance = new MemberList(); > } > return instance; > } > > > /** > * Append to memeberlist > * @param tempMember > * @returns void > */ > public function appendtomemelist(tempMember:MemberObject):void { > var userId:int = tempMember.userId; > memberList[userId] = tempMember; > } > > > /** > * Creating memberlist > * @param obj from server > * creates MemberObject object and adds to memberlist dictionary > * @returns void > */ > public function addToMemberlist(obj:Object):void { > for(var i:int=0;i<obj.length;i++) { > var tempMember:MemberObject = new MemberObject() > tempMember.fill(obj[i]); > appendtomemelist(tempMember); > } > } > > > /** > *Set instance of memberList null on logout > */ > public static function setInstanceNull():void{ > instance = null; // clear mermber information in the current > session > } > } > } > > On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Josh McDonald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > If it's not giving away any business secrets, why on earth would you want > to subclass Dictionary? Flex already has some sort of built in support for > singletons, I believe. > > -J > > > > On Wed, May 14, 2008 at 2:43 PM, Mayur Bais <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Any specific reason why we should not extend dictionary..? > I got it working by writing one getter method in the class which returned > dictionary... > just curious........ > > > > On Tue, May 13, 2008 at 11:11 PM, Alex Harui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Don't extend dictionary, just return a Dictionary. > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On > Behalf Of *Mayur Bais > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 13, 2008 2:11 AM > *To:* [EMAIL PROTECTED]; flexcoders@yahoogroups.com > *Subject:* [flexcoders] error while extending dictionary error .. > > > > Hi all, > I have class extending a dictionary class: > > public class mydict extends Dictionary > { > public static instance:mydict // done to maintain singleton class > function mydict (){ > super(); > } > > public static funtion getInstance():mydict { > return instance; > } > > function addTodict(id:int,val:String):void{ > mydict [id] = val // its giving me error here...can not create > proeprty 26..(if id was 26..) on mydict > } > } > > > > Any work around?? > > Regards > Mayur > > > > > > -- > "Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee." > > :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald > :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > -- "Therefore, send not to know For whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee." :: Josh 'G-Funk' McDonald :: 0437 221 380 :: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
