Hmm, I think we decided that we could get safely rid of that arg, so next
time you merge it's gonna be gone from the base LzNode method.
On undefined, Philip Romanik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> FYI, I've been adding an optional argument to the destroy methods in the
> data objects to get around this issue.
>
>
>
> Compiler error: at [/tmp/lzswf9/lzgen55150/$lzc$ class_basecomponent.as:
> 230]: Error: Incompatible override.
>
> override function destroy () {
> ^
>
> This is because we're not matching the destroy() method signature because
> of the secret "recursiveCall" arg that LzNode.destroy uses
>
> function destroy( recursiveCall = null){
>
> That's a source change right?
>
>
> Yes, but I don't really want to change all the classes in the LFC and in
> the component libraries (and random user apps) that define a destroy()
> method to give them an optional argument.
>
> I wonder if we could make it so that destroy() method on LzNode takes no
> args, and then have
> some other internal "destroy" method that takes the extra arg.
>
>
--
Henry Minsky
Software Architect
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
