mIRC Home    About    Download    Register    News    Help

Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: add classes support [Re: xemacs] #173770 29/03/07 03:20 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 580
N
NaquadaServ Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
N
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 580
To all you OOP fans, besure to check out my post in the Developer Forum titled Java applications for mIRC - Interested?.

BTW, this new project I'm working on was insired, in part, by this thread... smile


NaquadaBomb
www.mirc-dll.com
Re: add classes support [Re: xemacs] #174105 02/04/07 10:59 AM
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3
S
starGaming Offline
Self-satisified door
Offline
Self-satisified door
S
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3
I started such a project a few weeks ago and found your proposal now. Instead of inventing a new syntax in MSL I just (ab)used normal aliases. See the (actually very extensive) documentation in the script for details.

If you have any comments, feel free to post to the thread.

Re: add classes support [Re: astigmatik] #174682 11/04/07 03:18 AM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 155
S
Strider Offline
Vogon poet
Offline
Vogon poet
S
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 155
Originally Posted By: astigmatik
I know that this is an old topic BUT I'd just donate my two cents here and I hope Khaled will not make it Java-style if ever he adds classes. It just sucks; all the extends, implements.

LOL. The only thing I don't like about Java is that sometimes I find it annoying having to use all those "set" (mutator) and "get" (accessor) methods, thanks to the fact that there's no support for Properties like in C#; code can become a nested parenthesis mess thanks to them.

Re: add classes support [Re: Strider] #174707 11/04/07 03:44 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 580
N
NaquadaServ Offline
Fjord artisan
Offline
Fjord artisan
N
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 580
Originally Posted By: Strider
LOL. The only thing I don't like about Java is that sometimes I find it annoying having to use all those "set" (mutator) and "get" (accessor) methods, thanks to the fact that there's no support for Properties like in C#; code can become a nested parenthesis mess thanks to them.


Using accessors and mutators is simply good OOP program, it's called encapulation. It prevents invalid or unauthorized changes to variables. Any variable could be modified from outside the class it's declared as "public" and isn't "final".

While I do not know C# (or rather, how it's different from C++), I would have to say losing encapulation isn't good OOP. wink


NaquadaBomb
www.mirc-dll.com
Re: add classes support [Re: NaquadaServ] #174709 11/04/07 03:56 PM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,523
Q
qwerty Offline
Hoopy frood
Offline
Hoopy frood
Q
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 2,523
I had the same thoughts at first but after taking a quick look at C#'s properties, I realised that the mutator and the accessor are included in the property definition (the property serves both as a method and a field, in Java-speak). I can see now how this would be handy (although incorporating something like this in Java may not be pretty).


/.timerQ 1 0 echo /.timerQ 1 0 $timer(Q).com
Re: add classes support [Re: qwerty] #174721 11/04/07 07:22 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 155
S
Strider Offline
Vogon poet
Offline
Vogon poet
S
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 155
Yeah, I really don't think it will ever be incorporated to Java.

Page 2 of 2 1 2