> > ALSA_HPP_CLASS& set_##name(...) { ...; return *this; }\
>
> Is there a reason why you return the object itself? Usually, returning
> an object implies that that object is a _different_ object with the
> setting applied, which would mean that the original object was _not_
> changed, but that isn't true here.
I'm not an OO design guru, but at least IOC (IBM OpenClass; it used to
be a rather powerful multiplatform GUI framework - before they made it
AIX only) used this very paradigma all over the place.
You were supposed to write statements like:
obj.method1().method2().method3().___.method_n();
At least that's what all their example code looked like.
Best,
Michael
--
Michael Gerdau email: mgerdau@xxxxxxxxxx
GPG-keys available on request or at public keyserver
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Alsa-devel mailing list Alsa-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://mailman.alsa-project.org/mailman/listinfo/alsa-devel
