[Clam-devel] TYPEDCONTROLS REFACTORING: Opinions about actual controls compatibility

[David García Garzón]

I don't know if still feasible, but my original suggestion was using two 
typedefs, that before the migration both would point to old In/Control but 
that after the migration the could point, one to the Base TypedConnection and 
the other to the float instantation. So you use the typedefs according to the 
semantics (if they are used as float control, or just using the generic 
interface)

David.

El Tuesday 05 August 2008 00:38:00 Francisco Tufró va escriure:
> Hi, one of the topics that we didn't defined about the typed control
> migration is what to do with the actual controls.
> The first idea (and the one i like most) was to do a simple typedef
> Typed[In|Out]Control [In|Out]Control.
> The problem with this solution is that there are functions implemented in
> InControl that have no sense in TypedInControl, specially those for bounds
> and GetLastValueAs[Int|Bool].
> My question is if it possible to structure the framework code so these
> functions can be removed. For example, NetworkEditor uses this bounding
> stuff, should we rethink the way it works with controls to simplify the
> migration.
> The other solution was to do InControl inherit TypedInControl and add the
> missing functionality, but i think this solution is going to bring problems
> when we migrate everything, and introduces some complexity to the framework
> that i don't know if it is correct, and that's why i'm asking for opinions.
> That's all by now!