I had included some sample code of what I am doing. I added the disposeChildren method to qx.core.Object, this is not a current method. I have a few other methods that I added to Object as well, but they are all similar to disposeChildren.
JimOn 9/25/06, Sebastian Werner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
as I understood Christians code he does not add new properties and
methods to object instances. He just add them to a already defined class.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I'm doing the same thing with the current rev.
Adding and modifying properties and methods (including modifiers) to a
alre
Jim, we talk about properties here, but right, this will affects fields
and methods, too.
Do you only fix properties to fulfill your custom needs or do you add
stuff, too?
Cheers,
Sebastian
Jim Hunter schrieb:
> I add both fields and methods to base classes. Here is an example of one
> of t
Sebastian Werner schrieb:
Hi Christian,
please explain what are your exact use cases. Do you just add properties
e.g. IDs etc. or do you even modify them? To you attach modifiers? Do
you do this on instance level or on prototype level?
Cheers,
Sebastian
Hi Sebastian, have a look at the
I add both fields and methods to base classes. Here is an example of one of the methods that I use all over my application (I use the disposeChildren() function everywhere to remove objects from the system as removeAll() does not work as detailed in many posts):
qx.Proto = qx.OO.classes["qx.core.Ob
Hi Christian,
please explain what are your exact use cases. Do you just add properties
e.g. IDs etc. or do you even modify them? To you attach modifiers? Do
you do this on instance level or on prototype level?
Cheers,
Sebastian
Christian Boulanger schrieb:
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> thanks for you
Hi Sebastian,
thanks for your input. I can only speak for myself, but my interest as
developer is to work with the existing classes instead of subclassing
them as new ones. This is much more flexible and allows me to extend the
behaviour of my application without having to rewrite a single line
OK, lets me explain the benefits of this new version, when it comes, and
let us find solutions for your needs. Sometimes it's not the best
solution to try to keep an existing system, especially when they have
some design issues. It might be better to reinvent the wheel in some
cases. And we def
Hej Christian!
Are you still struggling? Forget to migratewe have tried to do it in
house. The result: too costy Additionally, there are too many issues
we do not accept with the new version. Good luck in your struggling, but
the question is if you ever will be ready with version 1.
We ha
Sebastian Werner schrieb:
>
> I just mention this, because this will not work in the future. The plans
> for a new property system doesn't allow the dynamic addition of
> properties to previously defined classes.
>
> Maybe it's better to enhance the other properties to make it possible to
> use
I would like to chime in and say that if you remove the ability to add properties to already defined classes it will completely blow my program up. I have added many properties to many objects and I do it at run time so that I don't have to manage my custom code as opposed to the SVN code. Right no
Christian Boulanger schrieb:
> Sebastian Werner schrieb:
>> Christian Boulanger schrieb:
>>
>>> Sebastian Werner schrieb:
>>>
>>>
However I would like to mention again, that this is not a good idea.
Please use the userData support instead of custom runtime added properties.
Sebastian Werner schrieb:
> Christian Boulanger schrieb:
>
>> Sebastian Werner schrieb:
>>
>>
>>> However I would like to mention again, that this is not a good idea.
>>> Please use the userData support instead of custom runtime added properties.
>>>
>>> obj.setUserData("myproperty", "the
Christian Boulanger schrieb:
> Sebastian Werner schrieb:
>> Christian Boulanger schrieb:
>>
>>> Wouldn't a qx.OO.setProto("qx.core.Object") method be useful, which does
>>> the first two lines, in order to save some typing? This method could
>>> return qx.OO, so one could write
>>>
>>> qx.OO.
Sebastian Werner schrieb:
> Christian Boulanger schrieb:
>
>> Wouldn't a qx.OO.setProto("qx.core.Object") method be useful, which does
>> the first two lines, in order to save some typing? This method could
>> return qx.OO, so one could write
>>
>> qx.OO.setProto("qx.core.Object").addProperty
Christian Boulanger schrieb:
> Dietrich Streifert schrieb:
>> Try this instead:
>>
>>
>> var constructor = qx.OO.classes["qx.core.Object"];
>> qx.Proto = constructor.prototype;
>> qx.OO.addProperty({ name: "myproperty", type:
>> qx.constant.Type.STRING, defaultValue: null});
>>
> Wouldn't a
Dietrich Streifert schrieb:
> Try this instead:
>
>
> var constructor = qx.OO.classes["qx.core.Object"];
> qx.Proto = constructor.prototype;
> qx.OO.addProperty({ name: "myproperty", type:
> qx.constant.Type.STRING, defaultValue: null});
>
Wouldn't a qx.OO.setProto("qx.core.Object") method b
Try this instead:
var constructor = qx.OO.classes["qx.core.Object"];
qx.Proto = constructor.prototype;
qx.OO.addProperty({ name: "myproperty", type:
qx.constant.Type.STRING, defaultValue: null});
Charles SALMON schrieb:
Hello,
In qooxdoo 0.5, I was able to add some properties (and
Hello,In qooxdoo 0.5, I was able to add some properties (and functions) to QxObject, WITHOUT having to modify the QxObject.js file, by doing:QxObject.addProperty(...) for propand QxObject.prototype.new_function
= function () {...} for function.in my 'qooxdooPatch.js' _javascript_ file.Now, in 0.6
19 matches
Mail list logo
