bryan.a.soto at gmail.com
Sun Apr 2 04:05:37 EDT 2006
On 4/1/06, Aleksi Niemela <Aleksi.Niemela at cs.helsinki.fi> wrote:
> Bryan Soto kirjoitti:
> > Perhaps the problem is that properties are generic, but not reusable.
> > As an example, for an Og enchanted class, perhaps field and fields
> > would be a better name than property and properties.
> I'm not sure if I have the same idea with Bryan but IMO instead of
> having static Domain Specific Language (DSL) we could end up having
> dynamically defined DSL for declaring properties, attributes or whatever
> would be great name for those.
> So by default Og would use "property" but Gtk users could say
> Og.dsl_keywords(:property => :my_own_foobar_keyword)
> class Foo # in which context #property would collide
> my_own_foobar_keyword :foo, String
That's pretty much it. In addition though, all the Og and Glue
internal code would use my_own_foobar_keywords to access all the
declared my_own_foobar_keyword items.
"Never tell people how to do things. Tell them what to do and they
will surprise you with their ingenuity." —General George S. Patton
More information about the Nitro-general