Re: [flexcoders] Functions as objects
Francis,
It worked in betas, but was removed on production build - we had to remove
samples from the chapter. In standard mode fails for us on access as well
with runtime error. More importantly, we can not extend Function datatype as
runtime fails instantiation stating that type Function is final. If that
restriction is removed, very cool OO tricks can be done.
Sincerely,
Anatole
On 12/8/06, Francis Cheng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You should be able to add properties to function objects, just as the
docs suggest. Unfortunately, it looks like this isn't working in strict mode
anymore. Oddly, it does work in standard mode, but that may not be a viable
workaround for you. I had a brief discussion about this with the engineers
that worked on it and their initial reaction was that this sounds like a
bug. I've filed it as such, and they will investigate it further.
Francis
--
*From:* flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On
Behalf Of *Derek Vadneau
*Sent:* Wednesday, December 06, 2006 8:15 AM
*To:* flexcoders
*Subject:* [flexcoders] Functions as objects
I've tried using the example from the docs where you assign the value
to a property on the function and then use arguments.callee.prop to
get the value, but Flex Builder gives me an error saying "Access of
possibly undefined property prop through a reference with static type
Function." when assigning the value to the function.
Example:
function test()
{
trace(arguments.callee.prop);
}
test.prop = "testing"; // Error
Global.as <http://global.as/> defines Function as dynamic yet FB produces
an error.
This is supposedly possible in AS3 as per:
http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flex/2/docs/1835.html
However, if you try the last example you'll get compiler errors.
Is there a way to add properties to a function? Or is this not supported
in AS3?
--
Derek Vadneau
Re: [flexcoders] Functions as objects
Thanks Clint! I completely forgot about describeType. That's MUCH better than tacking on a property - not that you shouldn't be able to do that, but describeType is better suited in this case. And thank you, Francis, for looking into this. It's good to hear that I'm not crazy! ... at least nothing proven here ... -- Derek Vadneau
Re: [flexcoders] Functions as objects
Derek So - just make setter method on closure object for function or define it as a property - it's just an old good pointer. Regards, Anatole On 12/8/06, Derek Vadneau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Funny, I just read that this morning. However, it doesn't really apply here. I need to pass a function object and the name will probably be different for each one. So assigning a value to a variable of the class isn't acceptable, since the value will change for each call. As I mentioned, I have a workaround, but I really want to know whether the documentation is correct and I've simply missed something, or Adobe needs to clean up the docs. On 12/8/06, Anatole Tartakovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > >Please see apply method > also I posted pre-edited cut from the book here: > http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/?p=125 - with closure object ala Flex > 1.5 you can use > > Thanks, > Anatole > > > > -- Derek Vadneau
RE: [flexcoders] Functions as objects
You should be able to add properties to function objects, just as the
docs suggest. Unfortunately, it looks like this isn't working in strict
mode anymore. Oddly, it does work in standard mode, but that may not be
a viable workaround for you. I had a brief discussion about this with
the engineers that worked on it and their initial reaction was that this
sounds like a bug. I've filed it as such, and they will investigate it
further.
Francis
From: flexcoders@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Derek Vadneau
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 8:15 AM
To: flexcoders
Subject: [flexcoders] Functions as objects
I've tried using the example from the docs where you assign the value
to a property on the function and then use arguments.callee.prop to
get the value, but Flex Builder gives me an error saying "Access of
possibly undefined property prop through a reference with static type
Function." when assigning the value to the function.
Example:
function test()
{
trace(arguments.callee.prop);
}
test.prop = "testing"; // Error
Global.as defines Function as dynamic yet FB produces an error.
This is supposedly possible in AS3 as per:
http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flex/2/docs/1835.html
<http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flex/2/docs/1835.html>
However, if you try the last example you'll get compiler errors.
Is there a way to add properties to a function? Or is this not supported
in AS3?
--
Derek Vadneau
Re: [flexcoders] Functions as objects
Here's some code to get the name of the currently executing function
dynamically if that's what you're after...
var traceTarget:TraceTarget = new TraceTarget();
// Log only messages for the classes in the mx.rpc.* and
// mx.messaging packages.
//traceTarget.filters=["mx.rpc.*","mx.messaging.*"];
// Log all log levels.
traceTarget.level = LogEventLevel.ALL;
// Add date, time, category, and log level to the
output.
// This is a bug right now... you can't include both date
and time.
traceTarget.includeDate = false;
traceTarget.includeTime = true;
traceTarget.includeCategory = true;
traceTarget.includeLevel = true;
traceTarget.filters = ["com.esria.logging"];
// Begin logging.
var logger:ILogger = Log.getLogger("com.esria.logging");
traceTarget.addLogger(logger);
Log.addTarget(traceTarget);
var d:String = DateUtil.formatDate(new Date(),
"MM/DD/YYY");
var x:XML = describeType(this);
var memberName:String = "undefined";
var members:XMLList = x.method.(@declaredBy==
this.className);
for each(var member:XML in members) {
memberName = [EMAIL PROTECTED];
if (this[memberName] == arguments.callee)
break;
}
logger.debug("{0}.{1}", this.className, memberName);
Quick note... You should build a hasmap of each classes members that get
returned by (x.method.(@declaredBy==this.className); ) if you plan on using
it more than once to save looping over the classes variable names.
On 12/8/06, Derek Vadneau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Funny, I just read that this morning. However, it doesn't really apply
here. I need to pass a function object and the name will probably be
different for each one. So assigning a value to a variable of the class
isn't acceptable, since the value will change for each call.
As I mentioned, I have a workaround, but I really want to know whether the
documentation is correct and I've simply missed something, or Adobe needs to
clean up the docs.
On 12/8/06, Anatole Tartakovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
>
> Please see apply method
> also I posted pre-edited cut from the book here:
> http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/?p=125 - with closure object ala Flex
> 1.5 you can use
>
> Thanks,
> Anatole
>
>
>
>
--
Derek Vadneau
Re: [flexcoders] Functions as objects
Funny, I just read that this morning. However, it doesn't really apply here. I need to pass a function object and the name will probably be different for each one. So assigning a value to a variable of the class isn't acceptable, since the value will change for each call. As I mentioned, I have a workaround, but I really want to know whether the documentation is correct and I've simply missed something, or Adobe needs to clean up the docs. On 12/8/06, Anatole Tartakovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Please see apply method also I posted pre-edited cut from the book here: http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/?p=125 - with closure object ala Flex 1.5 you can use Thanks, Anatole -- Derek Vadneau
Re: [flexcoders] Functions as objects
Please see apply method also I posted pre-edited cut from the book here: http://flexblog.faratasystems.com/?p=125 - with closure object ala Flex 1.5you can use Thanks, Anatole On 12/8/06, Derek Vadneau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: You shouldn't have to cast as an object. And, according to the docs, you should be able to simply add a property to a function and access it. No offense - I really do appreciate the effort to help me out - but casting seems to be a bit of a hack. Although I like AS3 there are some things that were so simple in AS1/AS2 that are just not possible, or require workarounds that really seem like hacks. All I wanted to do was give some context to a function so when it is called it could grab that context info. An example of what people have wanted from this from the MX days is getting the name of the function for various reasons, including debugging and logging. My particular reason is a little more complex and probably seems strange unless you know the entire context of what I'm trying to do, but here goes ... I built a class that extends Proxy. The idea is that someone would call a function on the instance of the class and I would resolve it from a dynamically added manifest. That part isn't hard, using the override for callProperty. However, if someone tries to call a function using [] syntax the getProperty override is actually called, and a function is expected to be returned. Unfortunately, that scenario breaks what I was trying to accomplish since it means I need to return an actual function object and the function is not able to know it's name for me to determine if the call should go through or return an error. I could determine this in the getProperty override, but I don't necessarily know if the user meant to call a function or access a property. What I wanted to do was pass a function object back with a property on the function that was the name of the function. Instead I've had to build a class that stores a value in a variable and has a method on it that gets returned from the getProperty override. That is such a waste considering Function is supposed to be able to do what I want. So, I have a workaround, but I really want to know whether the documentation is correct and I've simply missed something, or Adobe needs to clean up the docs. I've already posted a comment in the LiveDocs asking about this and it has not yet been approved. That was about a week ago. Can anyone else confirm this? Or does anyone know how to get the example code working? On 12/8/06, Clint Modien < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Function inherits from Object so you should be able to do... > > Object(this.test).prop = "someprop"; > > Why are you doing this? What are you trying to do... it sounds > interesting. > >
Re: [flexcoders] Functions as objects
You shouldn't have to cast as an object. And, according to the docs, you should be able to simply add a property to a function and access it. No offense - I really do appreciate the effort to help me out - but casting seems to be a bit of a hack. Although I like AS3 there are some things that were so simple in AS1/AS2 that are just not possible, or require workarounds that really seem like hacks. All I wanted to do was give some context to a function so when it is called it could grab that context info. An example of what people have wanted from this from the MX days is getting the name of the function for various reasons, including debugging and logging. My particular reason is a little more complex and probably seems strange unless you know the entire context of what I'm trying to do, but here goes ... I built a class that extends Proxy. The idea is that someone would call a function on the instance of the class and I would resolve it from a dynamically added manifest. That part isn't hard, using the override for callProperty. However, if someone tries to call a function using [] syntax the getProperty override is actually called, and a function is expected to be returned. Unfortunately, that scenario breaks what I was trying to accomplish since it means I need to return an actual function object and the function is not able to know it's name for me to determine if the call should go through or return an error. I could determine this in the getProperty override, but I don't necessarily know if the user meant to call a function or access a property. What I wanted to do was pass a function object back with a property on the function that was the name of the function. Instead I've had to build a class that stores a value in a variable and has a method on it that gets returned from the getProperty override. That is such a waste considering Function is supposed to be able to do what I want. So, I have a workaround, but I really want to know whether the documentation is correct and I've simply missed something, or Adobe needs to clean up the docs. I've already posted a comment in the LiveDocs asking about this and it has not yet been approved. That was about a week ago. Can anyone else confirm this? Or does anyone know how to get the example code working? On 12/8/06, Clint Modien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Function inherits from Object so you should be able to do... Object(this.test).prop = "someprop"; Why are you doing this? What are you trying to do... it sounds interesting.
Re: [flexcoders] Functions as objects
Function inherits from Object so you should be able to do...
Object(this.test).prop = "someprop";
Why are you doing this? What are you trying to do... it sounds interesting.
On 12/6/06, Derek Vadneau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've tried using the example from the docs where you assign the value
to a property on the function and then use arguments.callee.prop to
get the value, but Flex Builder gives me an error saying "Access of
possibly undefined property prop through a reference with static type
Function." when assigning the value to the function.
Example:
function test()
{
trace(arguments.callee.prop);
}
test.prop = "testing"; // Error
Global.as defines Function as dynamic yet FB produces an error.
This is supposedly possible in AS3 as per:
http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flex/2/docs/1835.html
However, if you try the last example you'll get compiler errors.
Is there a way to add properties to a function? Or is this not supported
in AS3?
--
Derek Vadneau
[flexcoders] Functions as objects
I've tried using the example from the docs where you assign the value
to a property on the function and then use arguments.callee.prop to
get the value, but Flex Builder gives me an error saying "Access of
possibly undefined property prop through a reference with static type
Function." when assigning the value to the function.
Example:
function test()
{
trace(arguments.callee.prop);
}
test.prop = "testing"; // Error
Global.as defines Function as dynamic yet FB produces an error.
This is supposedly possible in AS3 as per:
http://livedocs.macromedia.com/flex/2/docs/1835.html
However, if you try the last example you'll get compiler errors.
Is there a way to add properties to a function? Or is this not supported in AS3?
--
Derek Vadneau
