Code review comment for lp:~thumper/nux/properties

Revision history for this message
Tim Penhey (thumper) wrote :

On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 02:43:23 you wrote:
> The owner would emit the signal when they change the underlying store. As
> long as its possible to emit the changed signal, that should cover the use
> case that Mikkel mentioned.

What about the use case where the property is entirely calculated?

The result may well change but no changed event emitted.

This is why I didn't have the ROProperty inherit from the event base. There
is no changed event to connect to, so no expectation of changes.

I added the ROProperty class because Neil had said he'd like one, but I have a
feeling that the basic Property class with a custom set method covers 99% of
our desired use cases for simple properties.


« Back to merge proposal