For the following JavaScript code, how can I write it in ReasonML?
class HelloWorld extends HTMLElement {
constructor() {
super();
// Attach a shadow root to the element.
let shadowRoot = this.attachShadow({mode: 'open'});
shadowRoot.innerHTML = `<p>hello world</p>`;
}
}
I could not find any documentation on writing classes in ReasonML? I cannot use plain objects/types as I need to extend from HTMLElement class which doesn't work with ES style classes.
I have looked into this existing question - How to extend JS class in ReasonML however, it is a different thing. To write web component, we need to extend HTMLElement and must call it with new keyword. ES5 style extension mechanism doesn't work.
You can't. Not directly at least, since BuckleScript (which Reason uses to compile to JavaScript) targets ES5 and therefore has no knowledge of ES6 classes.
Fortunately, ES6-classes require no special runtime support, but are implemented as just syntax sugar, which is why you can transpile ES6 to ES5 as shown in the question you link to. All you really have to do then, is to convert this transpiled output into ReasonML:
var __extends = (this && this.__extends) || function (d, b) {
for (var p in b) if (b.hasOwnProperty(p)) d[p] = b[p];
function __() { this.constructor = d; }
d.prototype = b === null ? Object.create(b) : (__.prototype = b.prototype, new __());
};
var BaseElement = (function (_super) {
__extends(BaseElement, _super);
function BaseElement() {
_super.call(this);
}
return BaseElement;
}(HTMLElement));
And depending on what specific class-features you actually need, you can probably simplify it a bit.
I'm currently testing some simple AngelScript stuff, and noticed something I find a bit strange when it comes to how objects are initialized from classes.
Let's say I define a class like this:
class MyClass {
int i;
MyClass(int i) {
this.i = i;
}
}
I can create an object of this class by doing this:
MyClass obj = MyClass(5);
However it seems I can also create an object by doing this:
MyClass obj;
The problem here is that obj.i becomes a default value as it is undefined.
Additionally, adding a default constructor to my class and a print function call in each one reveals that when I do MyClass obj = MyClass(5); BOTH constructors are called, not just the one with the matching parameter. This seems risky to me, as it could initialize a lot of properties unnecessarily for this "ghost" instance.
I can avoid this double-initialization by using a handle, but this seems more like a work-around rather than a solution:
MyClass# obj = MyClass(5);
So my question sums up to:
Can I require a specific constructor to be called?
Can I prevent a default constructor from running?
What's the proper way to deal with required parameters when creating objects?
Mind that this is purely in the AngelScript script language, completely separate from the C++ code of the host application. The host is from 2010 and is not open-source, and my knowledge of their implementation is very limited, so if the issue lies there, I can't change it.
In order to declare class and send the value you choose to constructor try:
MyClass obj(5);
To prevent using default constructor create it and use:
.
MyClass()
{
abort("Trying to create uninitialized object of type that require init parameters");
}
or
{
exit(1);
}
or
{
assert(1>2,"Trying to create uninitialized object of type that require init parameters");
}
or
{
engine.Exit();
}
in case that any of those is working in you environment.
declaring the constructor as private seems not to work in AS, unlike other languages.
I am starting studying OOP and I want to learn what constitutes a class. I am a little confused at how loosely some core elements are being used and thus adding to my confusion.
I have looked at the C++ class, the java class and I want to know enough to write my own pseudo class to help me understand.
For instance in this article I read this (.. class attribute (or class property, field, or data member)
I have seen rather well cut out questions that show that there is a difference between class property and class field for instance What is the difference between a Field and a Property in C#?
Depending on what language I am studying, is the definition of
Property
Fields
Class variables
Attributes
different from language to language?
"Fields", "class variables", and "attributes" are more-or-less the same - a low-level storage slot attached to an object. Each language's documentation might use a different term consistently, but most actual programmers use them interchangeably. (However, this also means some of the terms can be ambiguous, like "class variable" - which can be interpreted as "a variable of an instance of a given class", or "a variable of the class object itself" in a language where class objects are something you can manipulate directly.)
"Properties" are, in most languages I use, something else entirely - they're a way to attach custom behaviour to reading / writing a field. (Or to replace it.)
So in Java, the canonical example would be:
class Circle {
// The radius field
private double radius;
public Circle(double radius) {
this.radius = radius;
}
// The radius property
public double getRadius() {
return radius;
}
public void setRadius(double radius) {
// We're doing something else besides setting the field value in the
// property setter
System.out.println("Setting radius to " + radius);
this.radius = radius;
}
// The circumference property, which is read-only
public double getCircumference() {
// We're not even reading a field here.
return 2 * Math.PI * radius;
}
}
(Note that in Java, a property foo is a pair of accessor methods called getFoo() and setFoo() - or just the getter if the property is read-only.)
Another way of looking at this is that "properties" are an abstraction - a promise by an object to allow callers to get or set a piece of data. While "fields" etc. are one possible implementation of this abstraction. The values for getRadius() or getCircumference() in the above example could be stored directly, or they could be calculated, it doesn't matter to the caller; the setters might or might not have side effects; it doesn't matter to the caller.
I agree with you, there's a lot of unnecessary confusion due to the loose definitions and inconsistent use of many OO terms. The terms you're asking about are used somewhat interchangeably, but one could say some are more general than others (descending order): Property -> Attributes -> Class Variables -> Fields.
The following passages, extracted from "Object-Oriented Analysis and Design" by Grady Booch help clarify the subject. Firstly, it's important to understand the concept of state:
The state of an object encompasses all of the (usually static) properties of the object plus the current (usually dynamic) values of each of these properties. By properties, we mean the totality of the object's attributes and relationships with other objects.
OOP is quite generic regarding certain nomenclature, as it varies wildly from language to language:
The terms field (Object Pascal), instance variable (Smalltalk), member object (C++), and slot (CLOS) are interchangeable, meaning a repository for part of the state of an object. Collectively, they constitute the object's structure.
But the notation introduced by the author is precise:
An attribute denotes a part of an aggregate object, and so is used during analysis as well as design to express a singular property of the class. Using the language-independent syntax, an attribute may have a name, a class, or both, and optionally a default expression: A:C=E.
Class variable: Part of the state of a class. Collectively, the class variables of a class constitute its structure. A class variable is shared by all instances of the same class. In C++, a class variable is declared as a static member.
In summary:
Property is a broad concept used to denote a particular characteristic of a class, encompassing both its attributes and its relationships to other classes.
Attribute denotes a part of an aggregate object, and so is used during analysis as well as design to express a singular property of the class.
Class variable is an attribute defined in a class of which a single copy exists, regardless of how many instances of the class exist. So all instances of that class share its value as well as its declaration.
Field is a language-specific term for instance variable, that is, an attribute whose value is specific to each object.
I've been doing oop for more than 20 years, and I find that people often use different words for the same things. My understanding is that fields, class variables and attributes all mean the same thing. However, property is best described by the stackoverflow link that you included in your question.
Generally fields, methods, static methods, properties, attributes and class (or static variables) do not change on a language basis... Although the syntax will probably change on a per language basis, they will be function in the way you would expect across languages (expect terms like fields/data members to be used interchangably across languages)
In C#....
A field is a variable that exists for a given instance of a class.
eg.
public class BaseClass
{
// This is a field that might be different in each instance of a class
private int _field;
// This is a property that accesses a field
protected int GetField
{
get
{
return _field;
}
}
}
Fields have a "visibility" this determines what other classes can see the field, so in the above example a private field can only be used by the class that contains it, but the property accessor provides readonly access to the field by subclasses.
A property lets you get (sometimes called an accessor) or set (sometimes called a mutator) the value of field... Properties let you do a couple of things, prevent writing a field for example from outside the class, change the visibility of the field (eg private/protected/public). A mutator allows you to provide some custom logic before setting the value of a field
So properties are more like methods to get/set the value of a field but provide more functionality
eg.
public class BaseClass
{
// This is a field that might be different in each instance of a class
private int _field;
// This is a property that accesses a field, but since it's visibility
// is protected only subclasses will know about this property
// (and through it the field) - The field and property in this case
// will be hidden from other classes.
protected int GetField
{
// This is an accessor
get
{
return _field;
}
// This is a mutator
set
{
// This can perform some more logic
if (_field != value)
{
Console.WriteLine("The value of _field changed");
_field = value;
OnChanged; // Call some imaginary OnChange method
} else {
Console.WriteLine("The value of _field was not changed");
}
}
}
}
A class or static variable is a variable which is the same for all instances of a class..
So, for example, if you wanted a description for a class that description would be the same for all instance of the class and could be accessed by using the class
eg.
public class BaseClass
{
// A static (or class variable) can be accessed from anywhere by writing
// BaseClass.DESCRIPTION
public static string DESCRIPTION = "BaseClass";
}
public class TestClass
{
public void Test()
{
string BaseClassDescription = BaseClass.DESCRIPTION;
}
}
I'd be careful when using terminology relating to an attribute. In C# it is a class that can be applied to other classes or methods by "decorating" the class or method, in other context's it may simply refer to a field that a class contains.
// The functionality of this attribute will be documented somewhere
[Test]
public class TestClass
{
[TestMethod]
public void TestMethod()
{
}
}
Some languages do not have "Attributes" like C# does (see above)
Hopefully that all makes sense... Don't want to overload you!
Firstly, you need to select a language. For example, I would recommend you to select Ruby language and community. Until you select a language, you cannot escape confusion, as different communities use different terms for the same things.
For example, what is known as Module in Ruby, Java knows as abstract class. What is known as attributes in some languages, is known as instance variables in Ruby. I recommend Ruby especially for its logical and well-designed OOP system.
Write the following in a *.rb file, or on the command line in irb (interactive Ruby interpreter):
class Dog # <-- Here you define a class representing all dogs.
def breathe # <-- Here you teach your class a method: #breathe
puts "I'm breathing."
end
def speak # <-- Here you teach your class another method: #speak
puts "Bow wow!"
end
end
Now that you have a class, you can create an instance of it:
Seamus = Dog.new
You have just created an instance, a particular dog of class Dog, and stored it in the constant Seamus. Now you can play with it:
Seamus.breathe # <-- Invoking #breathe instance method of Seamus
#=> I'm breathing.
Seamus.speak # <-- Invoking #speak instance method of Seamus
#=> Bow wow!
As for your remaining terminology questions, "property" or "attribute" is understood as "variable" in Ruby, almost always an instance variable. And as for the term "data member", just forget about it. The term "field" is not really used in Ruby, and "class variable" in Ruby means something very rarely used, which you definitely don't need to know at this moment.
So, to keep the world nice and show you that OOP is really simple and painless in Ruby, let us create an attribute, or, in Ruby terminology, an instance variable of Dog class. As we know, every dog has some weight, and different dogs may have different weights. So, upon creation of a new dog, we will require the user to tell us dog's weight:
class Dog
def initialize( weight ) # <-- Defining initialization method with one argument 'weight'
#weight = weight # <-- Setting the dog's attribute (instance variable)
end
attr_reader :weight # <-- Making the dog's weight attribute visible to the world.
end
Drooly = Dog.new( 16 ) # <-- Weight now must provide weight upon initialization.
Drooly.weight # <-- Now we can ask Drooly about his weight.
#=> 16
Remember, with Ruby (or Python), things are simple.
I discovered in my question that Properties as defined in .Net are just a convenience syntax for code, and they are not tied to underlying variables at all (except for Auto-Implemented Properties, of course). So, saying "what is the difference between class property and class field" is like saying: what is the difference between a method and an attribute. No difference, one is code and the other is data. And, they need not have anything to do with each other.
It is really too bad that the same words, like "attribute" and "property", are re-used in different languages and ideologies to have starkly different meanings. Maybe someone needs to define an object-oriented language to talk about concepts in OOP? UML?
In The Class
public class ClassSample
{
private int ClassAttribute;
public int Property
{
get { return ClassAttribute; }
set { ClassAttribute = value; }
}
}
In the Program
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var objectSample = new ClassSample();
//Get Object Property
var GetProperty = objectSample.Property;
}
}
How do I write a class that implements this TypeScript interface (and keeps the TypeScript compiler happy):
interface MyInterface {
(): string;
text2(content: string);
}
I saw this related answer:
How to make a class implement a call signature in Typescript?
But that only works if the interface only has the bare function signature. It doesn't work if you have additional members (such as function text2) to be implemented.
A class cannot implement everything that is available in a typescript interface. Two prime examples are callable signatures and index operations e.g. : Implement an indexible interface
The reason is that an interface is primarily designed to describe anything that JavaScript objects can do. Therefore it needs to be really robust. A TypeScript class however is designed to represent specifically the prototype inheritance in a more OO conventional / easy to understand / easy to type way.
You can still create an object that follows that interface:
interface MyInterface {
(): string;
text2(content: string);
}
var MyType = ((): MyInterface=>{
var x:any = function():string { // Notice the any
return "Some string"; // Dummy implementation
}
x.text2 = function(content:string){
console.log(content); // Dummy implementation
}
return x;
}
);
There's an easy and type-safe way to do this with ES6's Object.assign:
const foo: MyInterface = Object.assign(
// Callable signature implementation
() => 'hi',
{
// Additional properties
text2(content) { /* ... */ }
}
)
Intersection types, which I don't think were available in TypeScript when this question was originally asked and answered, are the secret sauce to getting the typing right.
Here's an elaboration on the accepted answer.
As far as I know, the only way to implement a call-signature is to use a function/method. To implement the remaining members, just define them on this function. This might seem strange to developers coming from C# or Java, but I think it's normal in JavaScript.
In JavaScript, this would be simple because you can just define the function and then add the members. However, TypeScript's type system doesn't allow this because, in this example, Function doesn't define a text2 member.
So to achieve the result you want, you need to bypass the type system while you define the members on the function, and then you can cast the result to the interface type:
//A closure is used here to encapsulate the temporary untyped variable, "result".
var implementation = (() => {
//"any" type specified to bypass type system for next statement.
//Defines the implementation of the call signature.
var result: any = () => "Hello";
//Defines the implementation of the other member.
result.text2 = (content: string) => { };
//Converts the temporary variable to the interface type.
return <MyInterface>result;
})(); //Invokes the closure to produce the implementation
Note that you don't need to use a closure. You could just declare your temporary variable in the same scope as the resulting interface implementation. Another option is to name the closure function to improve readability.
Here's what I think is a more realistic example:
interface TextRetriever {
(): string;
Replace(text: string);
}
function makeInMemoryTextRetriever(initialText: string) {
var currentText = initialText;
var instance: any = () => currentText;
instance.Replace = (newText: string) => currentText = newText;
return <TextRetriever>instance;
}
var inMemoryTextRetriever = makeInMemoryTextRetriever("Hello");
For example suppose I have
class Parent {
def method() {
var myvar = "test"
}
}
Is there any mechanism for accessing myvar in child classes?
Edit:
I'm trying to build a DSL modeled upon an existing language. That language has features such as
onTrade {
if (price == ...) // will compile
}
onDayStart {
if (price == ...) // will not compile
}
It is as if price is a global variable but there are compile time checks to make sure it is only used in the correct context. I was thinking one way to simulate this would be to have local variables that could be overridden in subclasses. Something like
// Parent
onTrade {
var price = ...
}
// Child
onTrade {
if (price == ...)
if (somethingelse == ...) // will not compile
}
Not really. That's scope for you. If you want it to be visible at different levels, you should probably change the scope of the variable itself.
For example, if you want to define it at the class level, you can share it that way. Local variables wouldn't be local if they weren't actually, well, local.
Scopes are nested, from the most broad, to the most local. Chapter 2, pg. 16 of the Scala Language Reference covers "Identifiers, Names, and Scopes" which explains this in more technical detail.
Possible solution for your problem (though I don't see a way to get rid of new):
// parent
var onTrades = List[OnTrade]()
class OnTrade {
var price = ...
...
onTrades = this :: onTrades
}
// child
new OnTrade {
if (price == ...) {...} // subclass constructor, will call OnTrade constructor first
}