[chuck-users] broken inheritance ?
signal.automatique at gmail.com
Thu Oct 7 16:12:11 EDT 2010
On 7 October 2010 21:46, Thomas Girod <girodt at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks, it did the trick ! and about the other thing, looks like it was
> a mistake after all.
IMHO it's ChucK that's wrong, not you. As I read the documentation and from
what we are able to deduct from the way that functions work classes should
be able to be defined anywhere in the file that we feel is the most
convenient or natural place with the parser sorting it out, then complaining
if something is really wrong (circular inheritance or whatever).
That doesn't do you much good now as you need to work with the VM that we
have and not with some platonic reflection of the specifications, but I
still wanted to point that out; Wherever possible it's much better to blame
ChucK than it is to blame yourself. Blaming yourself just makes you sad
while loudly blaming ChucK will hopefully lead to a better ChucK and
everyone will be much happier ;¬).
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the chuck-users