realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Overloading in RB 5

To: REALbasic Network Users Group <realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Subject: Re: Overloading in RB 5
From: Brady Duga <duga at ljug dot com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2003 09:59:25 -0800

On Thursday, March 20, 2003, at 09:43 AM, Joseph J. Strout wrote:

At 12:10 PM -0500 3/20/03, Charles Yeomans wrote:

I don't believe that Variant is a subclass of Object.

What, you think I'm making this stuff up? :) I'm telling you that it is.

What, you mean you aren't making it all up? Dang, now I owe Will 5 bucks. :)

It is in fact correctly documented to be a sub of Object, though it is a little confusing as it isn't listed under classes (with most of the other objects) but under "Data Types" instead. There it is called a "Special Data Type", rather than an "Intrinsic Data Type" like everyone else listed there. It is also the only object other than Date that is in that list. It might make sense to just move variant and date up under classes. I'm not really sure how either of these objects are more "data types" than the other objects. Of course, variants are further confusing in that they are the only object you don't create with "new" or some other explicit creation routine.

--Brady
The La Jolla Underground


---
A searchable archive of this list is available at:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/search.php>

Unsubscribe:
<mailto:realbasic-nug-off at lists dot realsoftware dot com>

Subscribe to the digest: <mailto:realbasic-nug-digest at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>