Re: ChildChange vs ChildAdded, ChildRemoved

How about numchildren++=function()?

Andrew Kohlsmith <[email protected]> writes:
>> Put it this way, with ChildChange, it will virtually always start:
>>
>> ChildChange ++= function(v) {
>>     if (indexof(v) > -1) ...
>>     else ...
>>
>> What's the point?
>
> I agree, as I posted in -patches -- minimizing the API is good, but there is 
> an extreme that seems to be exceeded here.  Sure you can do
>
> ChildChange ++= function(v) {
>      if (indexof(v) > -1) { ChildAdded = v; }
>      else { ChildRemoved = true; }
> }
>
> To get this stuff back but if every goddamned widget set is gonna need this 
> kind of treatment, isn't this *SCREAMING* that this kind of thing is required 
> and probably better suited to be in the core interface?
>
> -A.
>
> _______________________________________________
> core mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.xwt.org/listinfo/core
>

-- 
"It's lucky," he added, after a pause, "that there are such a lot of
islands in the world.  I almost envy you, Mr. Watson."

                                                   -- Mustapha Mond