Em 28/8/2012 12:46, michael.vancann...@wisa.be escreveu:
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
Em 28/8/2012 09:15, michael.vancann...@wisa.be escreveu:
On Tue, 28 Aug 2012, Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
Why not let TFPObservedOperation as integer and define constants.
It could define a constant like ooUser = 32
Below ooUser is reserved for future default constants
Above ooUser could be added custom messages
This is how LCL messages works
Exactly because it is not meant as a general messaging interface,
and I want the interface to reflect this.
There is a clear intended use case: Mainly notification of changes.
This is the purpose i intend to use (replace my implementation).
Basically is a tree structure that needs to be observed. To avoid
performance problems like having to parse all the tree when a change
occurs i defined actions when a Child is added, deleted or inserted.
Exactly. You should use ooAddItem, ooDeleteItem, and pass the treenode
in Data.
To be clear what i would need to do with the current approach:
Your example is not correct. I don't see why you would not use
ooItemAdded.
This was just the first thing that comes in mind.
I have a simple interface to observing a tree. Looking more carefully i
really can use ooItem* for children. I also defined a "Change"
notification for the object itself plus another for the child/item but
i could differentiate using data as nil. The other missing one is to
Load (lazy loading)
We can agree on the exact number of operations that we define, but I will
not implement a system with an open number of operations.
I will do some tests and inform if there's a generic enough case to be
included as a default notification
Thanks for the explanations
Luiz
_______________________________________________
fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel
