[M3devel] M3CG_Ops vs. M3CG

[Jay K]

Not gratuitous but I think I found a workaround.I will change the various M3x86/M3C/other. New functions to return M3CG_Ops.Public instead of M3CG.T.So that cm3/M3Backend.m3 can set the additional data fields, and then just returnit as the new same old fully opaque M3CG.T to the rest of cm3.

I think a type with very limited visible is about as good as a type with nothing visible.
When I was exploring the system, I also found this separation a slightspeed bump into learning. You look at M3CG for something useful and find nothing there.I suppose that is maybe the Modula-3 way, but it seems more obscure than usual.Usually there is just one interface for this sort of construct I think, not two.
 - Jay

Subject: Re: [M3devel] M3CG_Ops vs. M3CG
From: hosking at purdue.edu
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:44:10 +1000
CC: m3devel at elegosoft.com
To: jay.krell at cornell.edu

Jay, this seems like a gratuitous change. I strongly suggest not for now. 

Sent from my iPhone
On Sep 21, 2015, at 12:41 PM, Jay K <jay.krell at cornell.edu> wrote:




Is the distinction between M3CG.T and M3CG_Ops.T useful?
Might as well just move M3CG_Ops.T and Public into M3CG?

And then maybe for compatibility M3CG_Ops.T = M3CG.T; M3CG_Ops.Public = M3CG.Public;


 - Jay


 		 	   		  
_______________________________________________
M3devel mailing list
M3devel at elegosoft.com
https://mail.elegosoft.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/m3devel
 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://m3lists.elegosoft.com/pipermail/m3devel/attachments/20150921/2cf24fbb/attachment-0002.html>