Re: Binding name must be same as ivar name?
Re: Binding name must be same as ivar name?
- Subject: Re: Binding name must be same as ivar name?
- From: mmalcolm crawford <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 10:44:38 -0800
On Feb 24, 2005, at 9:52 AM, mmalcolm crawford wrote:
On Feb 24, 2005, at 9:39 AM, glenn andreas wrote:
The real power of "binding names need not correspond" isn't just
"use a different name" but that you can have derived information
bound and automatically updated when the data it is derived from
changes.
Although correct, this is a different issue. This relates to an
object being bound to, not the object being bound.
Hmm, this probably needs further clarification...
Although with one interpretation of the statement it is correct, in the
context of the current discussion and terminology, the statement is
actually incorrect.
Binding names are the names of attributes of an object that may be
bound.
You bind an object's binding to another object using a keypath. It is
items in a keypath that can have derived values. This is a general
property of key-value coding, and dependent values is a feature of
key-value observing, both of which may find utility in contexts other
than bindings.
mmalc
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden