Zugg Software :: View topic - Creating libraries/modules/units/whatever term you prefer?

Newbie Joined: 07 Dec 2004 Posts: 8

Is it possible to build a new object type within zApp? Something similar to say memo or edit or panel or what have you.

As in, I want to define a new class, call it WEBSERVICE (an object presenting an interface to do web services, as an example). I want to write code describing what a webservice class does, how it works, standard OO design stuff. I then want to import this WEBSERVICE library into a zApp program, and declare objects of type WEBSERVICE.

I've noticed in your examples, that you've imported other zApp files, but it seems like you do so to reference the specific object instances they've defined, rather than pulling new object types from them.

I know you do this at the engine level (your default object types, as examples), but I am interested in doing it at a user code level.

Is this sort of functionality in the system, or will it be in the future, or is this completely outside the scope of what you plan on doing.

Posted: Wed Dec 22, 2004 2:09 am

Yes, zApp will have a way to define your own objects. But I need to clarify this since it can get complicated:

zApp will have a way to create your own object classes that will work as COM objects internal to your zApp applications. Unlike normal Windows COM objects, these zApp objects will NOT be accessible outside of zApp.

In addition, these will be strictly "COM" objects, which means they are non-visual. For Visual objects, like your own EDIT control or something like that, you need to create an ActiveX object, which is beyond the scope of zApp. But you can create an ActiveX object in Delphi, Visual Basic, Visual Studio, .NET, etc and then use it in zApp.

The main issue with zApp "objects" is performance. zApp objects are scripted and interpreted. This means less performance. For objects that require high performance, you should create the COM object using a compiled language, again like Delphi, Visual Studio, etc.

So, I'm not sure if this will work for the "web service" object you mentioned or not. And it's certainly something that is subject for change and improvement once I start implementing it. So, you might post more details about what kind of specific object functionality you are looking for. This is a great time to influence the implementation.

Newbie Joined: 07 Dec 2004 Posts: 8

I'm honestly looking for something that will allow me to do the following:

Declare a new type, preferably one that can be used exactly as though it were a native type, but something similar will suffice.

Give this new type properties and methods (obvious OO programming stuff). Inheritance would be nice, but not absolutely necessary.

As far as objects being non-visual. Why not hit the point between, and allow the object to be visual, but only insofar as it is composed of other parts. That is allow a type that, say, has a textbox with a button. The button triggers some default code that is part of the object. Something similar to the way file upload controls are designed in HTML forms, as an example.

The object I gave as an example would essentially need (at a minimum) to store data, and be able to access SOAP via a method or set of methods (e.g. using the Google Web API). I've done it in ASP before, it's not exceptionally difficult, but it sounds flashy compared to an example like a linked list. If you got inheritance in place it would be a good starting point for building apps that pull data from web services in general. Again, I just used it as an example.

I know the limitations of script code pretty well. I develop a web app for the company I work at. Yes, it can be pretty slow. It's a matter of learning how to fine tune things, and you can still get reasonable performance.