Re: Attachability
Re: Attachability
- Subject: Re: Attachability
- From: Emmanuel <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2001 08:57:25 +0100
on 2/1/01 4:54 PM, Stephen Bryant at email@hidden wrote:
>
I'd appreciate some pointers to information about the techniques and possible
>
uses of attaching scripts to attachable applications and their objects.
At 4:49 +0100 5/02/01, Richard 23 wrote:
>
First here's my proposed solution, one which I've mostly implemented
>
with a stay open applet and a consistent filing scheme:
[snipped a very interesting and clear description of a solution for a
library system]
At 5:33 +0100 5/02/01, What does not kill you only makes you stronger wrote:
>
Here is one example of something I have been using for my own internal
>
scripts for awhile now. They make my life a ton easier.. (Watch those line
>
wraps, etc.. ;-)
[snipped a very interesting and clear description of a solution for a
library system]
Stephen,
These latest posts could be part of a reply to yours. Consider how
difficult and complex it may be to build a library system. Consider that
this complexity may vanish entirely if your scripts actually belonged to
objects: each object may be responsible for some category of handlers, so
that it becomes natural to call each object when necessary.
---------------
tell myMailManager to CheckMail()
---------------
Here is a simple way of making "CheckMail()" available to all, isn't it.
Moreover, the inheritance of objects provides a built-in library system.
It would need much more (of my) bandwidth than available to enter into
sufficient details now. Some of the more powerful issues of attachability -
and in particular how it provides naturally code sharing - are discussed in
Smile's help. See the "Advanced Script Handling" section (OTTOMH).
HTH
Emmanuel