[Laszlo-user] proposal for new behavior of compiler when declaring child nodes with same name as attributes
P T Withington
ptw at pobox.com
Mon Jun 2 05:38:38 PDT 2008
I think this is a good proposal, since it should actually be pretty
rare that you want to declare an attribute that ends up being one of
your child nodes.
On 2008-05-28, at 13:24 EDT, Henry Minsky wrote:
> Sorry my message got cut off before I could finish it:
> This is a proposal in response to this bug, which came up when
> someone named
> a child view "layout", and got
> unexpected results in a view.
> The current compiler behavior is that it will allow you to declare a
> with the same name as an attribute,
> as long as the attribute has a null default value. This unfortunately
> applies to virtually every attribute
> declared in the schema, so in practice you can easily shadow all
> sorts of
> important properties in
> a view or node, by naming a child view with the same name as a class
> attribute, with no warning from the compiler.
> This proposal is that we add a new LZX attribute type, "node", which
> you can
> use to declare that
> an attribute name can have the same name as child node.
> So for example you could have
> <class name="myclass">
> <attribute name="titleview" type="node"/>
> <handler name="oninit">
> this.titleview.setAttribute('bgcolor', 0xcccccc);
> Then elsewhere you could say
> <view name="titleview">
> And the compiler would not complain.
> The existing compiler behavior would be changed so that for any
> except "node", if you name a child node
> with the same name as that attribute, you get a compiler warning,
> regardless of
> whether the attribute was declared with a default value.
> Henry Minsky
> Software Architect
> hminsky at laszlosystems.com
More information about the Laszlo-user