[DGD] Design question about inheritance code

[Michael McKiel]

 --- Steve Wooster <swooster at xprt.net> wrote: 
> As for your idea... I'm still getting familiar with DGD's style of 
> compiling, so I might be wrong, but I think that to update an inherited 
> file, you must destruct it, which would set 'temp' to nil. Am I 
> misunderstanding your suggestion?

I was thinking that the objectd would track all yer compiled libs, and the
pointers to the objects themselves, so that when something tries to inherit a
lib it would get the object from the objectd. 

So if before you destruct & re-compile_lib a library, you store its object
into a temp object variable. and wrap the re-compile around a catch.
If the compile fails, then you don't update the library in your objectd, so
you will still have an object to the original, if the compile is successful
you destruct 'temp'.

I haven't gotten very far in my own objectd so I dunno if thats possible, or
if keeping a pointer to the lib object will prevent it from being
destructed/recompiled, but seems there should be a way - 

OR perhaps atomicize the recompile functions. if the compile fails wouldn't
that NOT destruct the lib? I think... :)



______________________________________________________________________ 
Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca
_________________________________________________________________
List config page:  http://list.imaginary.com/mailman/listinfo/dgd