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

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

On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 20:07:40 you wrote:
> Ok, I know I am beating a dead horse here; you two agree so I am good
> with that :-)
> Nonetheless, I don't think my point has come across: My worry is that
> this is a purely dynamical property system and that it is exactly
> *unlike* member variables in that they are not related to (let alone
> defined in) the class.

Ah... I think this is where we disagree. It isn't a dynamical property

> So two instances a1 and a2 of class A could
> easily have totally different sets of properties.

No they couldn't.

> I wanted to avoid
> this by somehow making the property specs a part of the class
> definition in the .h file (probably by using some magical static
> initializers). This would also make property setup slightly
> (massively?) lighter at runtime because it would be per class and not
> per instance.

« Back to merge proposal