"Leslie P. Polzer" <[email protected]> writes:
> On Jan 19, 9:24 pm, Stephen Compall <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > 3. Children storage and flows: This approach solves the children storage
>> > problem for everyone, and provides a default make-widget-place-writer
>> > method. This means that you will very rarely need to write your own,
>> > unless you do something strange.
>>
>> It doesn't when storing children in lists is inconvenient. In my case,
>> I frequently store children in separate slots, or in the case of
>> services-and-pricing, in a fast-changing hash table. There are *no*
>> cases where I've defined a widget that stores children in lists; it's
>> never been the proper representation for me.
>
> Representational issues aside -- is it correct that MAP-SUBWIDGETS
> and GET-CHILDREN(-OF-TYPE) are basically isomorphic?
>
> I wouldn't like it to have the latter as a subset of the former.
It's rather the other way around -- map-subwidgets (as I understand it)
is an interface that lets you do things with your subwidgets.
{get|set}-children-of-type is a different solution to the same problem,
which (while admittedly being less elegant) also provides
make-widget-place-writer functionality.
--J.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"weblocks" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/weblocks?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
