Hi Toninho, and all
to elaborate on this, it might be a good idea to introduce syntax for
nullable (nilable) types, just like in C#
it would suffice to assert a declaration with type info, followed by a
question mark
DATA bDraw AS CODEBLOCK? INIT nil
Then this var can be set to a CODEBLOCK or to NIL at any time; just fyi,
i've come to incorporate such syntax in my (o)ceans' project and it works
like a charm
This syntax can be extended to type assertions for arguments to
functions/methods where another nuance in meaning is that this argument is
optional; i've gone one step further in (o)ceans' to imply that all args
which are not nullable are by default 'required' arguments
The TYPE? syntax was taken from C#
my two cents,
frank
----- Original Message -----
From: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <harbour@harbour-project.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 14, 2008 1:37 PM
Subject: [Harbour] Inconsistency in DATA Types
Hi folks,
I don´t know if this is an feature or a problem. If I have
DATA bDraw AS CODEBLOCK INIT nil
bDraw accept NIL without problem, but I can´t set it to nil again. If
I do:
oClass:bDraw = nil
I receive an error.
IMHO codeblock types can receive nil to easy checking, like:
if !( oClass:bDraw == nil )
Eval( oClass:bDraw )
endif
Thanks and best regards,
Toninho.
__________________________________________________
Faça ligações para outros computadores com o novo Yahoo! Messenger
http://br.beta.messenger.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
_______________________________________________
Harbour mailing list
Harbour@harbour-project.org
http://lists.harbour-project.org/mailman/listinfo/harbour
