OpenEuphoria

Re: Classes: A small proposal

• Posted by David Cuny <dcuny at DSS.CA.GOV> Jun 01, 1998
• 679 views

Ralf wrote:

>>PreProccesing ?? That is not needed at all.

I agree. I only meant the pre-processing to be an explanation by way of =
analogy. I certainly wouldn't expect it to actually *implemented* like =
that - not by Robert, anyway.

I don't really expect Robert to latch onto the dot notation [i.e.: =
object.function()], because it's just "syntactic sugar" - it's =
essentially a different way of writing something, without adding any new =
functionality. But OOP seems like something that would be a good thing =
to add native to Euphoria, now that Robert's gearing up to code another =
major version.

>>Look at the attached package.

Nice code - even documentation! 

By my count, that makes four contributions for Euphoria OOP extentions:

1. Francis Bussiere's (from *way* back when)
2. Irv's (in Windoz)
3. My own (in WinMan)=20
4. Yours [Ralf's].=20

Did I miss anyone?

Everyone but me seems to use type checking on their OOP attributes. I =
guess I'll cave and add some to my package, too.


> It is what I am using for NGL.

I can hardly wait. Your prior blurb looked very interesting. Will it =
support VGA as well?

[Dot Notation]

I personally think the dot notation:

   s.append( "hi there" )
   s.slice(1,End-1)

for:

   s =3D append( s, "hi there" )
   s =3D s[1..length(s)-1]

is cool even without it being OOP. I liked it so much, I went ahead and =
wrote a pre-processor. It's called Dot, and is on the Euphoria Web page. =
The latest version (sent in this morning) can be used in EE in place of =
PP - not that I expect anyone to really latch onto it.

As I mentioned, it's not OOP - but you can certainly combine it with an =
OOP package.

-- David Cuny