On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 09:18, Peter Schneider <[email protected]>wrote:
> Hello Derrell,
>
> thanks for the reply, but I think I don't get it. Probably I misunderstand
> your
> arguments.
>
> You say that qx.Class.include() can be used as well. I agree, but what
> would
> be the difference to the "direct" include?
>
You had copied, from Ralf's post, "But the class using the mixin knows its
using the mixin." That's not the case when qx.Class.include() is used to
attach a mixin to a class. The class may have no knowledge at all that the
mixin is attached to it. Rather, users of instances of that class know that
the mixin features are available.
That's why the class can't assume that the mixin is available in this case.
In the case with the include member of the class definition it could make
that assumption, but then you'd have two different orders of operation which
couldn't be counted on.
Does that make more sense?
Derrell
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lotusphere 2011
Register now for Lotusphere 2011 and learn how
to connect the dots, take your collaborative environment
to the next level, and enter the era of Social Business.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/lotusphere-d2d
_______________________________________________
qooxdoo-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/qooxdoo-devel
