Re: Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-16 Thread Dave Angel
On 01/-10/-28163 02:59 PM, rantingrick wrote: On Jul 16, 5:34 pm, Fabio Zadrozny wrote: I also like the idea of override annotations and I've created a blog post at:http://pydev.blogspot.com/2011/06/overrideimplements-templates-on-pyd... to explain how I do use it (and in a way that I think sh

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-16 Thread rantingrick
On Jul 16, 5:34 pm, Fabio Zadrozny wrote: > I also like the idea of override annotations and I've created a blog > post > at:http://pydev.blogspot.com/2011/06/overrideimplements-templates-on-pyd... > to explain how I do use it (and in a way that I think should be > standard in Python the same wa

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-16 Thread Fabio Zadrozny
On Sun, Jul 10, 2011 at 2:15 PM, rantingrick wrote: > On Jul 4, 3:43 am, Gregory Ewing wrote: >> rantingrick wrote: >> > what concerns me is the fact that virtual methods in derived >> > classes just blend in to the crowd. >> > I think we really need some >> > sort of visual cue in the form of fo

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-12 Thread alex23
rantingrick wrote: > i cannot force others If only you really understood that. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-12 Thread Chris Angelico
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 7:46 AM, rantingrick wrote: > Actually no i was purposely implying Mt. Vesuvius. You know, the > VOLCANO that erupted and left poor Pompeii in ruins? Here is some text > from the wiki verbatim: > Yes, I do know that mountain. But it doesn't have very many gods sitting on i

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-11 Thread rantingrick
On Jul 11, 9:41 am, Chris Angelico wrote: > On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:42 PM, rantingrick wrote: > > This mandate must be handed down from the gods who reside on "Mount > > REFUSE-E-OUS to RECOGNIZE-E-OUS a major PROBLEM-O-MOUS" > > I assume you're trying to reference Mount Olympus where the Gree

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-11 Thread Chris Angelico
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:42 PM, rantingrick wrote: > This mandate must be handed down from the gods who reside on "Mount > REFUSE-E-OUS to RECOGNIZE-E-OUS a major PROBLEM-O-MOUS" > I assume you're trying to reference Mount Olympus where the Greek gods live, but I'm left thinking more of Mount V

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-11 Thread rantingrick
On Jul 10, 11:45 pm, Michael Hrivnak wrote: > I can't believe you're saying that you will create a sub-class without > taking the time to understand the base class. I'm NOT saying that so stop putting words in my mouth! > Seriously?  That right > there is why you are seeing method overrides that

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-10 Thread Michael Hrivnak
I can't believe you're saying that you will create a sub-class without taking the time to understand the base class. Seriously? That right there is why you are seeing method overrides that aren't documented. How can you document something you don't understand? Furthermore, how can you have any c

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-10 Thread rantingrick
On Jul 10, 7:31 pm, Michael Hrivnak wrote: > It sounds to me like you need a better IDE, better documentation, > and/or better code to work on and use. Yes the last two points are relevant here. However whilst IDE choice belongs to the user, documentation and code are in the hands of the develope

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-10 Thread Michael Hrivnak
It sounds to me like you need a better IDE, better documentation, and/or better code to work on and use. I don't understand why it's difficult to look at a derived class as see what methods are overridden. If you are working on the code, it is quite obvious what methods exist in the base class.

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-10 Thread Chris Angelico
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 3:15 AM, rantingrick wrote: >  I suggest we solve this dilemma by forcing a syntax "tag" when > declaring clobbering virtual functions. Python has other dilemmas, too. I suggest we adopt the same solution. For instance, every statement should begin with a marker, so that w

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-10 Thread rantingrick
On Jul 4, 3:43 am, Gregory Ewing wrote: > rantingrick wrote: > > what concerns me is the fact that virtual methods in derived > > classes just blend in to the crowd. > > I think we really need some > > sort of visual cue in the form of forced syntactical notation (just > > like the special method

Re: Virtual functions are virtually invisible!

2011-07-04 Thread Gregory Ewing
rantingrick wrote: what concerns me is the fact that virtual methods in derived classes just blend in to the crowd. I think we really need some sort of visual cue in the form of forced syntactical notation (just like the special method underscores). If you're suggesting that it should be imp