On the new side of writing classes and have a little problem which I have tried researching but still no answer.
I want to create one instance of a class which creates multiple subclasses which creates subclasses of their own. The idea is to use code like this in main program:
procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
var
Temp : Integer;
begin
MainClass := TMainClass.Create(Form1);
Temp := MainClass.SubClass1.SubSubClass1.SomeValue;
end;
The main class looks like this and is created in seperate file:
TMainClass = class(TObject)
private
FSubClass1 : TSubClass1;
public
ValueFromAnySubClass : Integer;
property SubClass1 : TSubClass1 read FSubClass1 write FSubClass1;
procedure SetSomeValueFromMainClass(Value : Integer);
end;
...
...
...
procedure TMainClass.SetSomeValueFromMainClass(Value : Integer);
begin
ValueFromAnySubClass := Value;
end;
The sub class also in seperate file:
TSubClass1 = class(TObject)
private
FSubSubClass1 : TSubSubClass1;
public
property SubSubClass1 : TSubSubClass1 read FSubSubClass1 write FSubSubClass1;
end;
And now for the sub sub class also in seperate file:
TSubSubClass1 = class(TObject)
private
SomeValue : Integer;
function GetSomeValue : Integer;
procedure SetSomeValue(Value : Integer);
public
property SomeValue : Integer read GetSomeValue write SetSomeValue;
end;
...
...
...
procedure TSubSubClass1.SetSomeValue(Value : Integer);
begin
SetSomeValueFromMainClass(Value); <<< Error Here <<<
end;
How do I get to use the functions and procedures from the main class in my sub classes?
You don't need a subclass to use a function from another class. Also your sample code has not used subclasses at all. A proper subclass automatically has access to all public and proteced functions of its ancestors.
As David has already pointed out, there are serious flaws in your intended deisgn.
Furthermore, based on your comment:
The classes all perform vastly different functions but need to write data to a piece of hardware at the end of the day. The data is read from the hardware and kept in memory to work with until its written back to the hardware component once all work is completed. The procedure in the main class takes care of writing real time data to the hardware whenever it is required by any of the subclasses.
to David's answer: you don't need subclasses at all.
All you need is a public method on your hardware class. And for each instance of your other classes to have a reference to the correct instance of your hardware class.
type
THardwareDevice = class(TObject)
public
procedure WriteData(...);
end;
TOtherClass1 = class(TObject)
private
FDevice: THardwareDevice;
public
constructor Create(ADevice: THardwareDevice);
procedure DoSomething;
end;
constructor TOtherClass1.Create(ADevice: THardwareDevice);
begin
FDevice := ADevice;
end;
procedure TOtherClass1.DoSomething;
begin
//Do stuff, and maybe you need to tell the hardware to write data
FDevice.WriteData(...);
end;
//Now given the above you can get two distinct object instances to interact
//as follows. The idea can be extended to more "other class" types and instances.
begin
FPrimaryDevice := THardwareDevice.Create(...);
FObject1 := TOtherClass1.Create(FPrimaryDevice);
FObject1.DoSomething;
//NOTE: This approach allows extreme flexibility because you can easily
// reference different instances (objects) of the same hardware class.
FBackupDevice := THardwareDevice.Create(...);
FObject2 := TOtherClass1.Create(FBackupDevice);
FObject2.DoSomething;
...
end;
The design looks really poor. You surely don't want to have all these classes knowing all about each other.
And any time you see a line of code with more than one . operator you should ask yourself if the code is in the right class. Usually that indicates that the line of code that has multiple uses of . should be in one of the classes further down the chain.
However, if you want to call a method, you need an instance. You write:
procedure TSubSubClass1.SetSomeValue(Value : Integer);
begin
SetSomeValueFromMainClass(Value);
end;
And naturally this does not compile. Because SetSomeValueFromMainClass is not a method of TSubSubClass1. Rather SetSomeValueFromMainClass is a method of TMainClass. So, to call that method, you need an instance of TMainClass.
Which suggests that, if you really must do this, that you need to supply to each instance of TSubSubClass1 an instance of TMainClass. You might supply that in the constructor and make a note of the reference.
Of course, when you do this you now find that your classes are all coupled together with each other. At which point one might wonder whether or not they should be merged.
I'm not saying that merging these classes is the right design. I would not like to make any confident statement as to what the right design is. Perhaps what you need is an interface that promises to implement the setter as a means to decouple things. All I am really confident in saying is that your current design is not the right design.
As far as I know Subclass word is usually using in inheritance concept but the code you wrote are some compound classes. As you may see the constructor of many classes in Delphi have an argument which named AOwner that may be TComponent or TObject or ...
If you define the constructors of your TSubclass1 and TSubSubClass1 like as follow and Change the Owner of classes that you defined as properties to Self in set functions you may access to your TMainClass by typecasting the Owner property.
I changed your code a little to just work as you want, but I suggest change your design.
TSubSubClass1 = class(TObject)
private
FOwner: TObject;
function GetSomeValue:Integer;
procedure SetSomeValue(const Value: Integer);
procedure SetOwner(const Value: TObject);
public
constructor Create(AOwner:TObject);reintroduce;
property Owner:TObject read FOwner write SetOwner;
property SomeValue : Integer read GetSomeValue write SetSomeValue;
end;
TSubClass1 = class(TObject)
private
FSubSubClass1: TSubSubClass1;
FOwner:TObject;
procedure SetSubSubClass1(const Value: TSubSubClass1);
procedure SetOwner(const Value: TObject);
public
constructor Create(AOwner:TObject);reintroduce;
property Owner:TObject read FOwner write SetOwner;
property SubSubClass1 : TSubSubClass1 read FSubSubClass1 write SetSubSubClass1;
end;
TMainClass = class(TObject)
private
FSubClass1: TSubClass1;
procedure SetSubClass1(const Value: TSubClass1);
public
ValueFromAnySubClass : Integer;
constructor Create;
property SubClass1 : TSubClass1 read FSubClass1 write SetSubClass1;
procedure SetSomeValueFromMainClass(Value : Integer);
end;
implementation
{ TSubSubClass1 }
constructor TSubSubClass1.Create(AOwner: TObject);
begin
Owner:=AOwner;
end;
function TSubSubClass1.GetSomeValue: Integer;
begin
Result:=TMainClass(TSubClass1(Self.Owner).Owner).ValueFromAnySubClass;
end;
procedure TSubSubClass1.SetOwner(const Value: TObject);
begin
FOwner := Value;
end;
procedure TSubSubClass1.SetSomeValue(const Value: Integer);
begin
TMainClass(TSubClass1(Self.Owner).Owner).SetSomeValueFromMainClass(Value);
end;
{ TSubClass1 }
constructor TSubClass1.Create(AOwner: TObject);
begin
Owner:=AOwner;
FSubSubClass1:=TSubSubClass1.Create(Self);
end;
procedure TSubClass1.SetOwner(const Value: TObject);
begin
FOwner := Value;
end;
procedure TSubClass1.SetSubSubClass1(const Value: TSubSubClass1);
begin
FSubSubClass1 := Value;
FSubSubClass1.Owner:=Self;
end;
{ TMainClass }
constructor TMainClass.Create;
begin
FSubClass1:=TSubClass1.Create(Self);
end;
procedure TMainClass.SetSomeValueFromMainClass(Value: Integer);
begin
ValueFromAnySubClass := Value;
end;
procedure TMainClass.SetSubClass1(const Value: TSubClass1);
begin
FSubClass1 := Value;
FSubClass1.Owner:=Self;
end;
you must put the proper filename in uses part of implementation.
Related
I have a class that contains a TObjectList<T> list of objects of another class.
TMyElementClass = class (TPersistent)
private
....
public
....
end;
TMyElemContainerClass = class (TPersistent)
private
fElemList: TObjectList<TMyElementClass>;
...
published
ElemList: TObjectList<TMyElementClass> read fElemList write fElemList;
end;
var
Elements: TMyElemContainerClass;
I register both classes:
System.Classes.RegisterClass (TMyElemContainerClass);
System.Classes.RegisterClass (TMyElementClass);
The problem is, when the Elements object is "saved" to a stream, all of the published fields are correctly saved, but the list itself isn't.
What's wrong?
TObjectList is not a streamable class. Just because you use it in a published property doesn't mean the streaming system automatically knows how to stream it. If you are using the DFM streaming system, only classes that derive from TPersistent are streamable, but TObjectList does not. You will have to implement custom streaming logic for it.
Consider changing your design to use TCollection and TCollectionItem instead, eg:
TMyElementClass = class (TCollectionItem)
private
...
public
...
published
...
end;
TMyElemCollectionClass = class (TCollection)
private
function GetElem(Index: Integer): TMyElementClass;
procedure SetElem(Index: Integer; Value: TMyElementClass);
public
constructor Create; reintroduce;
function Add: TMyElementClass; reintroduce;
function Insert(Index: Integer): TMyElementClass; reintroduce;
property Elements[Index: Integer]: TMyElementClass read GetElem write SetElem; default;
end;
TMyElemContainerClass = class (TPersistent)
private
fElemList: TMyElemCollectionClass;
procedure SetElemList(Value: TMyElemCollectionClass);
...
public
constructor Create;
destructor Destroy; override;
...
published
ElemList: TMyElemCollectionClass read fElemList write SetElemList;
end;
...
constructor TMyElemCollectionClass.Create;
begin
inherited Create(TMyElementClass);
end;
function TMyElemCollectionClass.GetElem(Index: Integer): TMyElementClass;
begin
Result := TMyElementClass(inherited GetItem(Index));
end;
procedure TMyElemCollectionClass.SetElem(Index: Integer; Value: TMyElementClass);
begin
inherited SetItem(Index, Value);
end;
function TMyElemCollectionClass.Add: TMyElementClass;
begin
Result := TMyElementClass(inherited Add);
end;
function TMyElemCollectionClass.Insert(Index: Integer): TMyElementClass;
begin
Result := TMyElementClass(inherited Insert(Index));
end;
constructor TMyElemContainerClass.Create;
begin
inherited;
fElemList := TMyElemCollectionClass.Create;
end;
destructor TMyElemContainerClass.Destroy;
begin
fElemList.Destroy;
inherited;
end;
procedure TMyElemContainerClass.SetElemList(Value: TMyElemCollectionClass);
begin
fElemList.Assign(Value);
end;
Remy gave you one avenue to try.
Another possible way would be implement this list streaming manually.
You would have to
derive your TMyElemContainerClass from TComponent
remove ElemList from published properties
override DefineProperties method that would declare some virtual, not-existing published property to be streamed in and out. You may even name it ElemList or by any other identifier you would see fit. It would be used by Delphi instead your TObjectList object.
implement stream-oriented reader and writer methods for the said virtual property, they should iterate through all the items and save/load them.
Explore documentation from here: http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/Libraries/Berlin/en/System.Classes.TComponent.DefineProperties
See one of many (and there really are many) examples (using arrays rather than lists, but the idea is the same) at How to use DefineProperties in a custom Class Object for Arrays - Delphi
Here is the object:
TCell = class(TPersistent)
private
FAlignmentInCell :byte;
public
constructor Create; virtual;
published
property AlignmentInCell:byte read FAlignmentInCell write FAlignmentInCell;
end;
this is its constructor:
constructor TCell.Create;
begin
inherited;
FAlignmentInCell:=5;
end;
Here is a function, which dynamically creates any object derived form TPersistent (parameter is class name provided as a string)
function CreateObjectFromClassName(AClassName:string):TPersistent;
var DynamicObject:TPersistent;
TempObject:TPersistent;
DynamicPersistent:TPersistent;
DynamicComponent:TComponent;
PersistentClass:TPersistentclass;
ComponentClass:TComponentClass;
begin
PersistentClass:=TPersistentclass(FindClass(AClassName));
TempObject:=PersistentClass.Create;
if TempObject is TComponent then
begin
ComponentClass:=TComponentClass(FindClass(AClassName));
DynamicObject:=ComponentClass.Create(nil);
end;
if not (TempObject is TComponent) then
begin
DynamicObject:=PersistentClass.Create; // object is really TCell, but appropriate constructor seems to be not called.
end;
result:=DynamicObject;
end;
My idea is to create new Cell (TCell) like this:
procedure TForm1.btn1Click(Sender: TObject);
var p:TPersistent;
begin
p := CreateObjectFromClassName('TCell');
ShowMessage(IntToStr(TCell(p).AlignmentInCell)); // it is 0. (Why?)
end;
When I want to check AlignmentInCell property I get 0, but I expected 5. Why? Is there way to fix it?
This is similar to a recent question.
You use TPersistentClass. But TPersistent does not have a virtual constructor, so the normal constructor for TPersistent is called, which is the constructor it inherits from TObject.
If you want to call the virtual constructor, you will have to declare a
type
TCellClass = class of TCell;
Now you can modify CreateObjectFromClassName to use this metaclass instead of TPersistenClass, and then the actual constructor will be called.
Also, TempObject is never freed. And instead of is, I would rather use InheritsFrom.
I did not test the following, but it should work:
function CreateObjectFromClassName(const AClassName: string; AOwner: TComponent): TPersistent;
var
PersistentClass: TPersistentclass;
begin
PersistentClass := FindClass(AClassName);
if PersistentClass.InheritsFrom(TComponent) then
Result := TComponentClass(PersistentClass).Create(AOwner)
else if PersistentClass.InheritsFrom(TCell) then
Result := TCellClass(PersistentClass).Create
else
Result := PersistentClass.Create;
end;
The compiler can't know for sure what value your variable of type TPersistentClass will hold at run time. So he assumes that it is exactly that: a TPersistentClass.
TPersistentClass is defined as a class of TPersistent. TPersistent has no virtual constructor, the compiler will therefore not include a call to dynamically look up the address of the constructor in the VMT of the actual class, but a 'hard-coded' call to the only matching constructor TPersistent has: the one it inherits from its base class TObject.
It might be a decision with reasons I don't know, but if you had chosen to define TCell as following
TCell = class(TComponent)
private
FAlignmentInCell: byte;
public
constructor Create(AOwner: TComponent); override;
published
property AlignmentInCell:byte read FAlignmentInCell write FAlignmentInCell;
end;
you wouldn't need TempObject and all the decision making in your CreateObjectFromClassName function (and the possible leaks as pointed out by others):
function CreateObjectFromClassName(AClassName:string): TComponent;
var
ComponentClass:TComponentClass;
begin
ComponentClass:=TComponentClass(FindClass(AClassName));
Result := ComponentClass.Create(nil);
end;
And make sure to manage the Results life-time as it has no Owner.
First, a little explanation about my situation:
I have a sample interface which is implemented by different classes, and these classes might not always have a shared ancestor:
IMyInterface = interface
['{1BD8F7E3-2C8B-4138-841B-28686708DA4D}']
procedure DoSomething;
end;
TMyImpl = class(TInterfacedPersistent, IMyInterface)
procedure DoSomething;
end;
TMyImp2 = class(TInterfacedObject, IMyInterface)
procedure DoSomething;
end;
I also have a factory method which is supposed to create an instance of an object which implements my interface. My factory method receives the class name as its parameter:
function GetImplementation(const AClassName: string): IMyInterface;
I tried two approaches to implement this factory method, the first one was using extended RTTI:
var
ctx : TRttiContext;
t : TRttiInstanceType;
begin
t := ctx.FindType(AClassName).AsInstance;
if Assigned(t) then
Result := t.GetMethod('Create').Invoke(t.MetaclassType, []).AsInterface as IMyInterface;
end;
In this approach I am calling the default constructor which is fine in my scenario. The problem with this is, at runtime, I get an error telling me the object does not support IMyInterface. What's more, the created object is not assigned to an interface variable; therefore, it will be leaked. I also tried returning the value using TValue.AsType method, but it gives me Access Violation:
function GetImplementation(const AClassName: string): IMyInterface;
var
ctx : TRttiContext;
rt : TRttiInstanceType;
V : TValue;
begin
rt := ctx.FindType(AClassName).AsInstance;
if Assigned(rt) then
begin
V := rt.GetMethod('Create').Invoke(rt.MetaclassType, []);
Result := V.AsType<IMyInterface>;
end;
end;
.
The second approach I tried was using a generic dictionary to hold pairs of , and provide registration, unregistration methods:
TRepository = class
private
FDictionary : TDictionary<string, TClass>;
public
constructor Create;
destructor Destroy; override;
function GetImplementation(const AClassName: string): IMyInterface;
procedure RegisterClass(AClass: TClass);
procedure UnregisterClass(AClass: TClass);
end;
Here I implemented GetImplementation method as this:
function TRepository.GetImplementation(const AClassName: string): IMyInterface;
var
Obj : TObject;
begin
if FDictionary.ContainsKey(AClassName) then
begin
Obj := FDictionary[AClassName].Create;
Obj.GetInterface(IMyInterface, Result);
end;
end;
This works fine, and I can call DoSomething method using the returned value of GetImplementation, but it still has the memory-leak problem; Obj which is created here is not assigned to any interface variable; therefore, it is not reference-counted, and is leaked.
.
Now, my actual question:
So my question is, how can I safely create an instance of a class which implements my interface at runtime? I saw Delphi Spring Framework, and it provides such functionality in its Spring.Services unit, but it has its own reflection routines and lifetime management models. I am looking for a lightweight solution, not a whole 3rd-party framework to do this for me.
Regards
The first case using the RTTI give you a access violation because the TRttiContext.FindType(AClassName) cannot find the Rtti info for the classes which are not registered or used explicity in the app.
So you can change your code to
function GetImplementation(AClass: TClass): IMyInterface;
var
ctx : TRttiContext;
t : TRttiInstanceType;
begin
t := ctx.GetType(AClass).AsInstance;
if Assigned(t) then
Result := t.GetMethod('Create').Invoke(t.MetaclassType, []).AsInterface As IMyInterface;
end;
and call in this way
AClass:=GetImplementation(TMyImp2);
Now if you want to use the Class name to invoke the class, using a list (like your TRepository class) to register the classes is a valid aproach. about the memory leak i'm pretty sure which is caused because the TMyImpl class is derived from the TInterfacedPersistent which not implement reference counting directly like the TInterfacedObject.
This implementation of the the TRepository must works ok.
constructor TRepository.Create;
begin
FDictionary:=TDictionary<string,TClass>.Create;
end;
destructor TRepository.Destroy;
begin
FDictionary.Free;
inherited;
end;
function TRepository.GetImplementation(const AClassName: string): IMyInterface;
var
Obj : TObject;
begin
if FDictionary.ContainsKey(AClassName) then
begin
Obj := FDictionary[AClassName].Create;
Obj.GetInterface(IMyInterface, Result);
end;
end;
{
or using the RTTI
var
ctx : TRttiContext;
t : TRttiInstanceType;
begin
t := ctx.GetType(FDictionary[AClassName]).AsInstance;
if Assigned(t) then
Result := t.GetMethod('Create').Invoke(t.MetaclassType, []).AsInterface As IMyInterface;
end;
}
procedure TRepository.RegisterClass(AClass: TClass);
begin
FDictionary.Add(AClass.ClassName,AClass);
end;
procedure TRepository.UnregisterClass(AClass: TClass);
begin
FDictionary.Remove(AClass.ClassName);
end;
I think I would opt for the second option, mainly because I prefer to avoid RTTI unless it is the only possible solution to a problem.
But in both your proposed options you state that
the object which is created here is not assigned to any interface variable
That's simply not true. In both cases you assign to Result which has type IMyInterface. If you have a memory leak, it is caused by some other code, not by this code.
And #RRUZ has found the cause of the leak – namely using TInterfacedPersistent which does not implement reference counted lifetime management. Your code won't leak for TInterfacedObject.
For what it is worth, I would assign directly to the interface variable rather than via an object reference, but that is just a matter of stylistic preference.
if FDictionary.TryGetValue(AClassName, MyClass) then
Result := MyClass.Create as IMyInterface;
You can do it using extended RTTI and TObject's GetInterface method:
function GetImplementation(const AClassName: string): IMyInterface;
var
ctx: TRttiContext;
t : TRttiInstanceType;
obj: TObject;
begin
Result := nil;
t := ctx.FindType(AClassName).AsInstance;
if Assigned(t) then begin
obj := t.GetMethod('Create').Invoke(t.MetaclassType, []).AsObject;
obj.GetInterface(IMyInterface, Result)
end;
end;
It won't work if the object overrides QueryInterface to do custom processing, but both TInterfacedPersistent and TInterfacedObject rely on GetInterface.
I was just wondering about why should I use property in a class instead of "normal" variables (class attributes?). What I mean is this:
TSampleClass = class
public
SomeInfo: integer;
end;
TPropertyClass = class
private
fSomeInfo: integer;
public
property SomeInfo: integer read fSomeInfo write fSomeInfo;
end;
What is the big difference? I know that I can define getter and setter methods for getting or saving the property respectively, but that is possible even without the variable being a "property".
I tried searching for why to use it, but nothing useful came up, so I'm asking here.
Thank you
This is just a very simple example of a specific case, but still, it is a very common case.
If you have a visual control, you might need to repaint the control when you change a variable/property. For instance, let's say your control has a BackgroundColor variable/property.
The simplest way of adding such a variable/property is to let it be a public variable:
TMyControl = class(TCustomControl)
public
BackgroundColor: TColor;
...
end;
And in the TMyControl.Paint procedure, you paint the background using the value of the BackgroundColor. But this doesn't do it. Because if you change the BackgroundColor variable of an instance of the control, the control doesn't repaint itself. Instead, the new background colour will not be used until the next time the control redraws itself for some other reason.
So you have to do it like this:
TMyControl = class(TCustomControl)
private
FBackgroundColor: TColor;
public
function GetBackgroundColor: TColor;
procedure SetBackgroundColor(NewColor: TColor);
...
end;
where
function TMyControl.GetBackgroundColor: TColor;
begin
result := FBackgroundColor;
end;
procedure TMyControl.SetBackgroundColor(NewColor: TColor);
begin
if FBackgroundColor <> NewColor then
begin
FBackgroundColor := NewColor;
Invalidate;
end;
end;
and then the programmer using the control has to use MyControl1.GetBackgroundColor to obtain the colour, and to use MyControl1.SetBackgroundColor to set it. That's awkward.
Using properties, you can have the best of both worlds. Indeed, if you do
TMyControl = class(TCustomControl)
private
FBackgroundColor: TColor;
procedure SetBackgroundColor(NewColor: TColor);
published
property BackgroundColor: TColor read FBackgroundColor write SetBackgroundColor;
end;
...
procedure TMyControl.SetBackgroundColor(NewColor: TColor);
begin
if FBackgroundColor <> NewColor then
begin
FBackgroundColor := NewColor;
Invalidate;
end;
end;
then
from the programmer's point of view, he can both read and set the background colour using a single identifier, the MyControl1.BackgroundColor property, and
the control is repainted when he sets it!
There are real-life advantages:
Properties can be changed to be read/write/read'n'write easily, without need to hassle with separate Getters and Setters all over the code;
Properties can be made public/published in child classes by just adding one line in initialization section;
Properties are more friendly when it comes to setting fields, compare "Label.Font.SetSize(14)" with "Label.Font.Size := 14", you can align ":=" with tabs/spaces and code will be much more readable;
EDIT: Another thing I thought of, properties force you to limit Get/Set methods to only 1 parameter, which is good for OOP. Compare that to some over-engineered functions:
GetItem(Index:integer; ForcedIndex:boolean=false):TItem //Forced index to get any value
GetItem(Index:integer; out Res:PItem):boolean //Result signals if out pointer is valid
I know that I can define getter and setter methods for getting or saving the property respectively, but that is possible even without the variable being a "property".
Well, no. Setters and getters are just normal methods that are called as such only once they are used as the read and write members of a property. Not having a property means not having a getter or a setter, even if they are named as such.
Furthermore; setters and getters are typically declared private or protected. So being able to call them when you use a public field instead of using a public property would require to move those methods to the public section.
Also, a big difference between fields and properties is the ability to be published and thus can be used in the object inspector. Fields (of other types then class or interface) can not be declared as published.
Properties can also be of great importance - or be usefull - in inheritance. Technically, you can't override a property, but you can mimic override in several ways. Some examples where property Name can be called from TDescendant, each with its own purpose:
1) Abstraction:
TBase = class(TObject)
protected
function GetName: String; virtual; abstract;
procedure SetName(const Value: String); virtual; abstract;
public
property Name: String read GetName write SetName;
end;
TDescendant = class(TBase)
private
FName: String;
protected
function GetName: String; override;
procedure SetName(const Value: String); override;
end;
2a) Protection (like Krom mentioned, ):
TBase = class(TObject)
private
FName: String;
function GetName: String;
procedure SetName(const Value: String);
protected
property Name: String read GetName write SetName;
end;
TDescendant = class(TBase)
public
property Name;
end;
2b)
TBase = class(TObject)
private
FName: String;
protected
function GetName: String;
procedure SetName(const Value: String);
end;
TDescendant = class(TBase)
public
property Name: String read GetName write SetName;
end;
By combinination of the above, you could change the behaviour of properties for descendant classes.
It is just a good programming practice to isolate the very "innards" of your class from the outside world. In addition, information about published properties are stored into RTTI generated for the class and can be accessed by their name, enumerated etc. This feature is used for example when reading a form from its serialized resource form.
One of main reason of using properties (regardless of it's more OO) is the validation of the input, for example if you need to limit the age of an employee class to be in valid range like 18..40
TEmp = class
private
FName: string;
FAge: Integer;
procedure SetAge(const Value: Integer);
procedure SetName(const Value: string);
published
property Name:string read FName write SetName;
property Age:Integer read FAge write SetAge;
end;
.....
procedure TEmp.SetAge(const Value: Integer);
begin
if not (Value in [18..40]) then
raise Exception.Create('Age must be between 18 and 40')
else
FAge := Value;
end;
You cant monitor the change in a variable without a property.
your read/writes for property dont have to be a variable they can be functions. And then you can manage the "onChange" of a property.
eg
TmyChange = procedure(Sender: Tobject) of object;
private
Fchange : TmyChange;
public
property SomeInfo: integer read getFoo write setFoo;
property onChange : TmyChange read Fchange write Fchange;
function getFoo : integer
begin
return localFoo;
end;
function setFoo (value : integer)
begin
// validate incoming value
localFoo=value;
if assigned(Fchange) then Fchange(self);
end;
I'm new to generics and need some help to structure a class and implement methods.
I'm trying to use generics to serialize any TObject-JSON. Moreover, I want to be able to reuse the code.
These are my questions:
How do I create a generic constructor? I want to be able to use Self or Default(T), but it returns just nil.
V := Marshal.Marshal(ReturnObject) - This method requires a TObject, but I do not know how to reference the current object that was passed in.
How can I use this inside a method? Look at the code snipped below, marked with "Question 3".
This is my code:
TFileOperationResult = class(TObject)
private
FSuccess: Boolean;
//Error: PException;
FLastError: Integer;
function GetFailure: Boolean;
property Failure: Boolean read GetFailure;
public
property Success: Boolean read FSuccess write FSuccess;
property LastError: Integer read FLastError write FLastError;
end;
TResponseObject<T: class> = class(TObject)
private
FReturnObject: T;
function GetReturnObject: T;
function BaseStringsConverter(Data: TObject): TListOfStrings;
public
constructor Create; overload;
property ReturnObject: T read GetReturnObject;
procedure Serialize;
end;
constructor TResponseObject<T>.Create;
begin
// Question 1 - What should go in here?
end;
function TResponseObject<T>.GetReturnObject: T;
begin
Result := Default(T);// Is this correct?
end;
procedure TResponseObject<T>.Serialize;
var
Marshal: TJSONMarshal;
V: TJSONValue;
begin
Marshal := TJSONMarshal.Create(TJSONConverter.Create);
Marshal.RegisterConverter(TResponseObject<T>, BaseStringsConverter);
V := Marshal.Marshal(ReturnObject); // Question 2 - How Can I refer to 'Self'?
OutPut := V.ToString;
Marshal.Free;
end;
Calling code:
procedure TForm1.Test;
var
FileOperationResult: TResponseObject<TFileOperationResult>;
begin
FileOperationResult := TResponseObject<TFileOperationResult>.Create;
FileOperationResult.Serialize;
end;
Question 3:
procedure TForm1.MoveCopyFile<THowNowResponse>(ASource, DDestination: String);
var
FileOperationResult: TFileOperationResult;
begin
FileOperationResult := TFileOperationResult.Create;
// What to do?
end;
Any other comments are much appreciated.
It's hard to tell exactly what you're trying to do here, but I can make a guess. For TResponseObject, you want an object that can contain another object and operate on it. In that case, you probably want to pass it in to the constructor, like so:
constructor TResponseObject<T>.Create(value: T);
begin
FReturnObject := value;
end;
Likewise, if you make a GetReturnObject method, it should probably return the value of the FReturnObject field. (Or you could make the read accessor of the property just reference FReturnObject directly.)
function TResponseObject<T>.GetReturnObject: T;
begin
Result := FReturnObject;
end;
It's really hard to answer #3 since I don't know what you're trying to do with this, but hopefully my answers to the first two will help you get back on track. Just remember that generics don't have to be confusing; they're basically just type substitution. Anywhere you'd use a normal type in a non-generic routine, you can replace it with a <T> to create a generic routine, and then substitute any type that fits the constraints for that particular T.