I tested the concat method with IE6 and yes it's really slow!
So the way would be to manually add the custom getters and setters to
qx.OO.getter and qx.OO.setter
Sebastian Werner schrieb:
Hi Dietrich,
The reason why this is coded this way, is that it performs dramatically
better. It omits a string concatenation for each setter and use the
cached entry instead.
Better would be to add your custom properties also to this qx.OO.setter
list.
Ciao,
Sebastian
Dietrich Streifert schrieb:
Hello List, Hello Sebastian (who is maybe deepest inside the object
property implementation),
In my application I need to add some properties to the whole widget
hierarchie (maybe bad style, but anyway). So I do the following:
qx.ui.core.Widget.prototype._x_path = null;
qx.ui.core.Widget.prototype.getXpath = function() {
return this._x_path;
};
qx.ui.core.Widget.prototype.setXpath = function(value) {
return this._x_path = value;
};
For setting this property (and a few other) properties I'm usualy
calling the set method of the instance
widgetInstance.set({xpath:'bla', foo:'blu', bar:'blo'});
The definition of the set method is in qx.core.Object.prototype:
qx.Proto.set = function(propertyValues)
{
if (typeof propertyValues !== "object") {
throw new Error("Please use a valid hash of property key-values
pairs.");
}
for (var prop in propertyValues)
{
try
{
this[qx.OO.setter[prop]](propertyValues[prop]);
}
catch(ex)
{
this.error("Setter of property " + prop + " returned with an
error", ex);
}
}
return this;
}
Because the method relies on the existence of the setter and getter in
qx.OO.setter this fails as self defined setters and getters are nevver
assigned to qx.OO.setter. This also seems to happen if we have a fast
property added through addFastProperty. As a side effect FF 2.0 freezes
on the massive exception fireing in the try catch block (at least for my
application which has a big widget stack).
The solution would be to not rely on qx.OO.setter and to assemble the
setter call through a string concatenation:
this['set'+qx.lang.String.toFirstUp(prop)](propertyValues[prop]);
In this case all setters and getters are catched.
Maybe this can eliminate the setter hash completely?
Any Ideas on this?
Thank you.
Best regards.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
qooxdoo-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
--
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
Dietrich Streifert
Visionet GmbH
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
qooxdoo-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
