Wed, 18 Jun 1902 08:00:00 GMT

Getting a method's address

In article <31B3AEAC.2...@telepost.no>,
Alf P. Steinbach <al...@telepost.no> wrote:

Quote
>You can get the address of a method using the address-of operator "@".

Doh! I had tried almost every possibility to get the address of the procedure,
but I didn't try:

@proc:=...@foo.ActualProc1;

That solved my problem.

Quote
>However, when calling it, the procedure prototype needs an extra
>parameter (pointer to the object, the "self" pseudo-parameter), which
>you must supply in the call.

I was aware that the self pointer was passed.. my problem was that
I couldn't get the address of the method.  

Quote
>Note:  if what you want is simply parameterizing some procedure with
>different operation depending on the type of an object, you should
>instead make this operation a virtual method and simply call the
>virtual method for that object.

Actually, it is a method that is part of a finite state machine.  It is
less cpu intensive if I override the actual method called instead of using a
case statement or jump table to figure out which method needs to be called.
The finite state machine exists within the object, and not between two
separate objects, so virtual methods would do me no good.

--TCA of NewOrder