comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive: archive » It seems that there is *a bit* polymorphism in IDL.

Home » Public Forums » archive » It seems that there is *a bit* polymorphism in IDL.

Show: Today's Messages :: Show Polls :: Message Navigator
E-mail to friend

Re: It seems that there is *a bit* polymorphism in IDL. [message #40541 is a reply to message #40464]

Thu, 12 August 2004 07:08

David Fanning
Messages: 11724
Registered: August 2001

Senior Member

David Fanning writes:

> Use the SCOPE_VARNAME function with the REF_EXTRA keyword
> to write a short general purpose GETPROPERTY *procedure* method
> that'll return any member variables referenced via
> keyword names
>
> o -> GetPoperty, member_1 = member_1, member_2 = member_2, etc.
>
> where object "o" has fields
>
> self.member_1
> self.member_2
> etc.
>
> Now you don't need a separate, functional, form of GetProperty!

Well, the contest judges have not exactly been overwhelmed with
the results so far. I expect most participants are trying to
bribe the IT guys to get IDL 6.1 installed before the turn
of the *next* millennium.

Anyway, here is a clue. The GetProperty method's call
prototype should simple be this:

PRO MyClass::GetProperty, _REF_EXTRA=extra

No other parameters are needed. :-)

Cheers,

David

--
David Fanning, Ph.D.
Fanning Software Consulting, Inc.
Coyote's Guide to IDL Programming: http://www.dfanning.com/

Report message to a moderator

[Message index]

		It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: tianyf on Wed, 11 August 2004 04:00
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: David Fanning on Thu, 12 August 2004 12:43
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: JD Smith on Thu, 12 August 2004 11:03
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: David Fanning on Thu, 12 August 2004 10:45
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: JD Smith on Thu, 12 August 2004 10:28
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: David Fanning on Thu, 12 August 2004 07:08
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: David Fanning on Wed, 11 August 2004 20:05
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: David Fanning on Wed, 11 August 2004 14:51
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: Mark Hadfield on Wed, 11 August 2004 14:34

Previous Topic:	Multiple IDL versions
Next Topic:	black window on fsc_surface & fsc_surface_log?

-=] Back to Top [=-

[ Syndicate this forum (XML) ] [

] [

]

Current Time: Sat Oct 11 16:39:14 PDT 2025

Total time taken to generate the page: 1.03588 seconds

		It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: tianyf on Wed, 11 August 2004 04:00
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: David Fanning on Thu, 12 August 2004 12:43
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: JD Smith on Thu, 12 August 2004 11:03
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: David Fanning on Thu, 12 August 2004 10:45
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: JD Smith on Thu, 12 August 2004 10:28
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: David Fanning on Thu, 12 August 2004 07:08
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: David Fanning on Wed, 11 August 2004 20:05
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: David Fanning on Wed, 11 August 2004 14:51
		Re: It seems that there is a bit polymorphism in IDL. By: Mark Hadfield on Wed, 11 August 2004 14:34