Re: GUI interface style query

["Grisha" <grisha@...>]

Sorry, I have to fix myself :)

> -- creates button and adds it to the dialog's children list
> function dialogbase:button()
>     local btn = ui.createbutton()
>     self:add(btn)
        return btn
> end

Grisha


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Grisha" <grisha@eagle.ru>
To: "Lua list" <lua@bazar2.conectiva.com.br>
Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: GUI interface style query


> I must note that the first approach should work faster with the first
> usecase, since there's no table constructor there. In similar situation I
> used different style: you can't access children through C interface, but
you
> can store references to them as separate Lua fields in the object.
Something
> like this:
>
> -- creates button and adds it to the dialog's children list
> function dialogbase:button()
>     local btn = ui.createbutton()
>     self:add(btn)
> end
>
> mydialog = ui.createdialog()
> mydialog.ok = mydialog:button()
> mydialog.cancel = mydialog:button()
>
> Best Regards,
> Grisha
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "David Given" <dg@cowlark.com>
> To: <lua@bazar2.conectiva.com.br>
> Sent: Friday, October 29, 2004 3:47 PM
> Subject: GUI interface style query
>
>
> > In-house, we're using Lua as a RAD scripting engine for our embedded
GUI.
> And,
> > I must say, it's working pretty nicely.
> >
> > So I'm writing a set of Lua wrappers around our OO-based hierarchical
> visible
> > object model. The basic primitives are: getchildren, getparent, add and
> sub.
> >
> > getparent, add and sub are pretty simple; getchildren, however, gets a
> list of
> > a particular object's children. What's the best way of returning this?
> >
> > Currently what it does is to return a tuple of all the object's
children.
> This
> > means that if you know how many children there are, you can do this:
> >
> >  child1, child2, child3 = object:getchildren()
> >
> > OTOH, if you don't, you have to do this:
> >
> >  childarray = {object:getchildren()}
> >
> > ...which is a bit ugly.
> >
> > The other approach is to have the C code construct an array and return
> that.
> > This means these two lines become:
> >
> >  child1, child2, child3 = unpack(object:getchildren())
> >
> > and:
> >
> >  childarray = object:getchildren()
> >
> > *shrug* Both approaches are equally valid. Does anyone have any
particular
> > comments, advice, related war stories?
> >
> > -- 
> > +- David Given --McQ-+ "Under communism, man exploits man. Under
> > |  dg@cowlark.com    | capitalism, it's just the opposite." --- John
> > | (dg@tao-group.com) | Kenneth Galbrith
> > +- www.cowlark.com --+
>