> On Thursday 12 Feb 2004 4:19 pm, James Edward Gray II wrote:
> > On Feb 12, 2004, at 9:21 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote:
>
> >
> > The choice is, of course, yours.
> >
> > If you're going to tie all these things together like that though and
> > keep track of everything, I think you should take Wi
On Feb 12, 2004, at 11:25 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote:
I am aware of this and have taken on board the things you've said
before.
Rethinking which object performs which task will help reduce the need
to loop
backs. For instance having a lever drive a gantry which drives a
signal
eliminates the nee
On Thursday 12 Feb 2004 4:19 pm, James Edward Gray II wrote:
> On Feb 12, 2004, at 9:21 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote:
> > I can understand the point that James made, in that the update of the
> > Trainset
> > objects is being made by a Tk event trigger, and could therefore simply
> > update the screen
On Feb 12, 2004, at 9:21 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote:
I can understand the point that James made, in that the update of the
Trainset
objects is being made by a Tk event trigger, and could therefore simply
update the screen at the same time, e.g. clicking on a lever throws a
signal
*and* updates the
On Tuesday 10 Feb 2004 10:41 pm, Wiggins d Anconia wrote:
> > On Feb 10, 2004, at 3:29 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote:
> > > Hi folks,
> >
> > Hello again.
> >
> > [snipped history]
> I hate beating a dead horse... but this discussion of your callbacks and
> triggering events that are caught by a main co
On Wednesday 11 Feb 2004 2:54 pm, R. Joseph Newton wrote:
> James Edward Gray II wrote:
> > On Feb 10, 2004, at 3:29 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote:
> > > Hi folks,
> >
> > Hello again.
> >
> > [snipped history]
> >
> > > One of the points made in the previous threads was that there should
> > > be no
>
James Edward Gray II wrote:
> On Feb 10, 2004, at 3:29 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
>
> Hello again.
>
> [snipped history]
>
> > One of the points made in the previous threads was that there should
> > be no
> > need for sub-classes to have a link back to it's parent, and through
> >
> On Feb 10, 2004, at 3:29 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote:
>
> > Hi folks,
>
> Hello again.
>
> [snipped history]
>
> > One of the points made in the previous threads was that there should
> > be no
> > need for sub-classes to have a link back to it's parent, and through
> > the
> > correct split
On Feb 10, 2004, at 3:29 AM, Gary Stainburn wrote:
Hi folks,
Hello again.
[snipped history]
One of the points made in the previous threads was that there should
be no
need for sub-classes to have a link back to it's parent, and through
the
correct splitting of functions (inter-instance in clas
Hi folks,
Thanks to previous threads on this list, I'm making pretty good progress on
what is my first OOP project. The improvements I've made after feedback are:
* logical bounderies between containers and contents (sub-classes)
* nicer interface functions
* (starting to use) named parameters,
10 matches
Mail list logo
