Re: [RFC][PATCH] Small enhancement for Glib::Object::Subclass

["muppet" <scott asofyet org>]

Jan Hudec said:
> Now, why I don't like such code:
>
> 1) It's a repetitive code. It will be the same for each subclassed
>    widget, except for the property names. Such code should be
>    autogenerated, or not needed at all.
> 2) The property name appears in more places than strictly necessary,
>    which makes it a bit more prone to error. When you change something,
>    you have to keep in mind where else the name appears. And, unlike C,
>    perl won't check for you.
> 3) It encourages long functions. Long functions are hard to reader to
>    read and harder to debug.

agreed.


> And one more argument is, that the current implementation is mostly
> useless (properties are mostly useful exactly because they have
> getter/setter). I try to make them useful for more cases.

i'm rather fond of the bounds-checking and documentation facilities, and the
fact that if you create properties, you get to use a perl-ish new, gratis, and
don't need to create accessors, and then they feel just like the Glib::Objects
with which they interact.

   $foo = Foo->new (one => $one, two => $two);
   $foo->set (three=>$three, one=>$other_one);




-- 
muppet <scott at asofyet dot org>