Re: [RexxLA] Class definitions

[ThSITC]

May *I*    ***again*** for the 100 ++ time *suggest* that RexxLA (and
ibm-netRexx) do open the ability to *attach* SOURCE Files
on these groups for ease of communications!

We are living in the 21. Century, folks, and time has changed ;-)

Full-Stop, an d *intentionally CROSS-copied*

no apologogies from my side.
Just an attempt to change the (very ancient) rules -)

Thomas Schneider.
==========================================================
Am 12.04.2012 21:20, schrieb Rick McGuire:

> Just guessing because you didn't include the entire program, but I'm
> guessing you defined your class in a separate file and are using
> ::requires to use it?  If so, then add the PUBLIC keyword to your
> class definition so that the using program can see it.
>
> Rick
>
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 3:15 PM, Dan Carter<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> As I have moved into the object world I gained proficiency in using the
>> build-in classes of ooRexx.  Now I am trying to make a class of my own and I
>> have encountered a fundamental problem I hope the list can help with.
>>
>>
>>
>> I wrote a class whose first lines are:
>>
>>
>>
>> ::CLASS logfile
>>
>> /* GWC 04/11/2012  logging
>> services                                           */
>>
>>
>>
>> ::METHOD init
>>
>>
>>
>>     USE ARG logpath, runname, rerun
>>
>>
>>
>>     stmLog = .Stream~new(logpath||"\logfile.log")
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> I use it to build an instance by:
>>
>>
>>
>> logobj = .logfile~new(logpath runname rerun)
>>
>>
>>
>> The doc is a little confusing about what happens and what is needed to
>> create an instance.  I have tried several combinations of self~init:super
>> and forward statements, but the error is always the same:
>>
>>
>>
>>      28 *-* logobj = .logfile~new(logpath, runname, rerun)
>>
>>         >E>    .LOGFILE =>  ".LOGFILE"
>>
>>         >V>    LOGPATH =>  "e:\user1\soco\ctl\testrun1.log"
>>
>>         >A>    "e:\user1\soco\ctl\testrun1.log"
>>
>>         >V>    RUNNAME =>  "testrun1"
>>
>>         >A>    "testrun1"
>>
>>         >V>    RERUN =>  "RERUN"
>>
>>         >A>    "RERUN"
>>
>>      28 *-* logobj = .logfile~new(logpath, runname, rerun)
>>
>>
>>
>> Error 97 running E:\User1\Projects\Rexxproj\jclanal.rex line 28:  Object
>> method not found
>>
>> Error 97.1:  Object ".LOGFILE" does not understand message "NEW"
>>
>>
>>
>> I even tried adding a NEW method to the class, but the same thing happened.
>> I am not even getting to the init method.
>>
>>
>>
>> What must I add or correct to be able to use my own classes?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rexxla-members mailing list -- mailto:[hidden email]
>> http://rice.safedataisp.net/mailman/listinfo/rexxla-members
>>
> _______________________________________________
> rexxla-members mailing list -- mailto:[hidden email]
> http://rice.safedataisp.net/mailman/listinfo/rexxla-members
>

--
Thomas Schneider (Founder of www.thsitc.com) Member of the Rexx Languge
Asscociation (www.rexxla.org) Member of the NetRexx Developer's Team
(www.netrexx.org)

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]
Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/

[Aviatrexx]

[Intentionally cross-posted to both RexxLA and NetRexx lists in order
to answer your intentionally cross-posted question.  You've been
repeatedly warned about this behavior, Thomas.]

On 4/12/12 21:35 Thomas Schneider said:
> May *I*    ***again*** for the 100 ++ time *suggest* that RexxLA (and
> ibm-netRexx) do open the ability to *attach* SOURCE Files
> on these groups for ease of communications!

Since this probably IS the 100th time: No, you may not suggest this
any more, Thomas.  And Yes, the answer to your suggestion is still NO.

> We are living in the 21. Century, folks, and time has changed ;-)

Indeed, some things have changed.  I'd like to think that the rules of
civil behavior in a social group have not, however.  That is where you
constantly offend, Thomas.

(I am oh-so-glad that I am not a woman and the object of your amorous
attention.  Didn't your mother teach you that "No" means "NO"?)

I'll tell you something else that hasn't changed in the 21st century,
Thomas: the delivery of electronic mail by a list server.

While it is true that many folks these days enjoy an Internet
bandwidth that corporations and universities would have killed for in
1990, there are a greater number of folks trying to read their emails
on devices much smaller than the 80-column data card of yore.

So, until you are willing to pony up for an iPad (and unlimited data
plan) for everyone on both of these lists, SHUT UP!

Fortunately, you hijacked a perfectly good and useful thread to make
your childishly petulant plea (Tommy: "I want a cookie."  Mother: "Not
now, it is too close to dinner."  Tommy: "I want a cookie."  Repeat ad
nauseam.) so only a subset of those lists will see that I have been
reduced to being rude.  I only barely suppressed the obscene expletive
between those two words, however.

> Full-Stop, an d *intentionally CROSS-copied*

You truly are un-trainable, aren't you Thomas?

> no apologogies from my side.

Nor from mine, any more.

> Just an attempt to change the (very ancient) rules -)

Which are still there for perfectly valid reasons that you apparently
cannot fathom.

If you wish to refer to an external file in your own postings to one
of these lists, Thomas, all you have to do is get a cyberlocker and
include the URL of your file in your posting.  Just Google
"cyberlocker" ... oh, I forgot.  You don't ever look up something that
you can ask someone else to do for you, right?

Here, let me Google that for you:

   http://lmgtfy.com/?q=cyberlocker

-Chip-

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]
Online Archive : http://ibm-netrexx.215625.n3.nabble.com/