mwieder wrote:
Hopefully that's a typo and not a circular reference.
So
A
|
B----C
|
D
Is perfectly reasonable. B has access to A, C has access to A, D has access
to C and A. But not B.
To use a textbook example,
if A=shape, B=circle, C=triangle, and D=right triangle
you wouldn't expect (or want) a right triangle to inherit anything from
circles, but any changes to triangle should be accessible from right
triangles. You might want all circles to be blue and all triangles to be
red. Those would be handlers in the B and C scripts. You could then have all
right triangles be black (in the D script), and that wouldn't affect other
types of triangles.
BR: yes that was a typo: thanks for this "textbook example" very helpful…
gives me the courage to try using it… as it could solve a number of challenges
where re-use of code *should* be the best practice but exactly how to
accomplish that without polluting a global API (backscript) with all kinds of
non-global, extraneous handlers/functions (and mysterious since you lose
context)… --one just needs to adopt a smart naming convention so that in the
PB, you know what is going on by look at the behavior/scripts file names…
Thanks for your patient responses
BR
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[email protected]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
