Re: add the "visible" radio_property to all objects.

[Shai Ayal]

On Dec 19, 2007 12:17 AM, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On 17-Dec-2007, Shai Ayal wrote:
>
> | On Dec 17, 2007 9:09 PM, John W. Eaton <address@hidden> wrote:
> | >
> | > On 15-Dec-2007, Shai Ayal wrote:
> | >
> | > | I attach a patch to add the visible property to all objects. The
> | > | property is of type radio_property with the allowed values of
> | > | "{on}|off"
> | > |
> | > | Shai
> | > |
> | > |
> | > | 2007-12-15  Shai Ayal  <address@hidden>
> | > |
> | > |         * graphics.h.in (all object classes) Add the visible property.
> | > |         * graphics.cc (all object classes) Ditto.
> | >
> | > If the visible property appears in all graphics objects, then I think
> | > it should probably be added to the base_properties class and inherited
> | > by all the others.
> |
> | I thought about it, but since even if it is in base_properties there
> | is still a lot of work getting it into each object::properties'
> | get/set methods, I decided to do alittle more work and add it to each
> | object.
> | Maybe we should change this somehow --
> | How about making each object::properties' get/set methods call
> | base_property::get/set after taking care of all the object's
> | properties, at the end, which should take care of all the properties
> | in base_properties?
>
> Is there a current need to have the visible property in all the
> objects, or is this just something that needs to be done eventually?
> If it is not needed for some specific feature now, then I think we
> should wait until after 3.0, then I can rearrange the way the set and
> get functions work so they call a method in the base class to handle
> base class properties and we can avoid duplication.  But I think that
> kind of change is too risky just before 3.0, which I'm stil planning
> for Friday.
I think It's OK to postpone. There really is no reason for adding the
"visible" property at this time

Shai



> jwe
>