Ralf Nieuwenhuijsen schrieb:
> 2008/8/28 Petr Kobalíček <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Hi Fabian,
>>
>> I used it, but I think it can be removed :-)
>>
>
> So, what is the best alternative and is that alternative working
> correctly on all browsers?
> It originally did a lot more than just insta
2008/8/28 Petr Kobalíček <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi Fabian,
>
> I used it, but I think it can be removed :-)
So, what is the best alternative and is that alternative working
correctly on all browsers?
It originally did a lot more than just instanceof .. i think
>
> I'm trying not to use legacy at
Hi!
> I used it, but I think it can be removed :-)
>
> I'm trying not to use legacy at all
Yes, please do not use qx.legacy, unless it's absolutely necessary, i.e.
during the time of migration. qooxdoo 0.8 applications should not depend
on those legacy classes, they're included to help with migr
Hi Fabian,
I used it, but I think it can be removed :-)
I'm trying not to use legacy at all
Thank you
- Petr
2008/8/28 Fabian Jakobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Petr Kobalíček schrieb:
>> Hi,
>>
>> How it's alternative to qx.util.Type.detect in qooxdoo 0.8.
>>
>> Should I use plain typeof keyword an
Petr Kobalíček schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> How it's alternative to qx.util.Type.detect in qooxdoo 0.8.
>
> Should I use plain typeof keyword and instanceof keywords instead ?
>
> Cheers
> - Petr
The original class is still there but has been moved to the legacy
namespace (qx.legacy.util.Type). You can use
Hi,
How it's alternative to qx.util.Type.detect in qooxdoo 0.8.
Should I use plain typeof keyword and instanceof keywords instead ?
Cheers
- Petr
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challeng
