[DGD] Re: status

[Noah Gibbs]

--- Robert Forshaw <iouswuoibev at hotmail.com> wrote:
> (to update 
> the objects that inherit a particular object
> requires destructing the 
> objects including the first one, but destructing an
> object with clones 
> causes the clones to lose their data, so you can't
> update the objects that 
> inherit from the first object AND update the objects
> that clone from the 
> first object... do I have that the right way
> round?).

  Yup, sounds like you've got it.

> What I don't understand is why this is the case. Why
> does an object have to 
> not be inherited by anything in order to update its
> children after being 
> recompiled?

  Well, the way to solve it would be if DGD let you
directly recompile an object that had child classes
(which it doesn't).  Instead you have to destruct and
recompile, which destroys all your clones (if any).

  I don't know what stands between DGD and that
capability.  You'd have to ask Felix.

  There are some weirdnesses in how it would work,
though I don't think it's any weirder than the current
system.  Like, if you recompiled a parent class then
all its child classes would immediately get the new
functionality.  This could make certain errors (like,
say, in the Auto object) instantly catastrophic... 
But then, there are cases like that for the current
system as well, though perhaps not as many.


=====
------
noah_gibbs at yahoo.com

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
_________________________________________________________________
List config page:  http://list.imaginary.com/mailman/listinfo/dgd