Re: Dumb moniker questions (was Re: Bonobo dependencies ...)

[Michael Meeks <michael helixcode com>]

Hi Miguel,

On 2 Dec 2000, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
> >       The get_name / set_name semantics are merely some bolierplate code
> > that I added to help simplify the creation of monikers, their semantics 
> > should be what is most useful for implementors. I think the following   
> > semantics are most useful:
>
> Michael, I am confused.  Why do we need those for, can you explain to
> me?
 
        When I wrote the first several monikers I spent a while factoring
out all the shared code I could find. So; it transpires that all of the   
monikers were doing the same work to store the text they were initialized
with, and return it on parse_display_name. Since I anticipated that
escaping would be neccessary, and in order to save code, I moved all this
common code into a couple of helper methods on the base moniker object,
and implemented a default get_display_name method to save the same code   
being copied a lot.
  
        Of course; we don't in fact need these functions in any sense 
beyond the cut and paste they remove, and the nice central point to fix   
the escaping issue. Other language bindings would do this themselfs.
  
        Regards,
  
                Michael.

-- 
 mmeeks gnu org  <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot