Re: Is KVO really as complicated as I think?
Re: Is KVO really as complicated as I think?
- Subject: Re: Is KVO really as complicated as I think?
- From: mmalcolm crawford <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 11:57:22 -0700
On Apr 27, 2004, at 10:44 AM, Steve Sims wrote:
Put another way, e should get updated when either a or b changes, f
should update when either c or e changes, and g should update when
either d or f changes. What should not happen is e or f being
updated/recreated if c or d changes. These values should be stored,
since it would be inefficient and computationally expensive to create
them every time g is wanted.
Maybe I'm being dumb, but I can't see a sensible way to accomplish
this right now.
You should still be able to set up relevant dependencies?
If you want to avoid recalculation then null out {e,f,g} when the
values on which they depend change (i.e. in relevant set accessors of
{a,b,c,d}) and recalculate and cache when the value is null?
mmalc
_______________________________________________
cocoa-dev mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/cocoa-dev
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.