* Should I use Tagged Records to be able to use Object Notation?
@ 2013-11-29 8:17 FritzVonBraun
2013-11-29 16:58 ` Jeffrey Carter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: FritzVonBraun @ 2013-11-29 8:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
I was wondering if it is a usual practice to make a record tagged so
that it is possible to call procedures as object.procedure instead of
having to write package.procedure( object ).
I know that there is a slight overhead involved with the tag but it
would certainly be easier. Is this a common practice or not?
Thanks
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Should I use Tagged Records to be able to use Object Notation?
2013-11-29 8:17 Should I use Tagged Records to be able to use Object Notation? FritzVonBraun
@ 2013-11-29 16:58 ` Jeffrey Carter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Jeffrey Carter @ 2013-11-29 16:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
On 11/29/2013 01:17 AM, FritzVonBraun wrote:
> I was wondering if it is a usual practice to make a record tagged so that it is
> possible to call procedures as object.procedure instead of having to write
> package.procedure( object ).
> I know that there is a slight overhead involved with the tag but it would
> certainly be easier. Is this a common practice or not?
It does seem to be common. You should also remember that tagged types are always
passed by reference, which may not be the case if the type is not tagged.
--
Jeff Carter
"We use a large, vibrating egg."
Annie Hall
44
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2013-11-29 16:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2013-11-29 8:17 Should I use Tagged Records to be able to use Object Notation? FritzVonBraun
2013-11-29 16:58 ` Jeffrey Carter
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox