[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Speaking of RESTORING

David Fanning wrote:
> Folks,
> While we are on the topic of restoring SAVE files,
> have you noticed the new RESTORED_OBJECTS keyword
> on the RESTORE command? You can get a list of saved
> object references. This should make it much easier to
> re-compile the object methods. :-)

That's been around for a while, since 5.2 maybe (?).  In fact, that's how the
original version of resolve_object worked (though I think it was called
restore_object then).  

Not to belabor this point, but the issue at hand is that you need to have
defined the class *before* you restore the object (which has the side effect of
defining it using a potentially out of date definition).  Hence the whole
resolve_object, CLASS=class formalism.  And hence Craig's efforts to parse the
save file for class information prior to restoring it (to obviate apriori
knowledge of the object's class).

By the way, there are two ways to get the object (suppose only one), in the SAVE

restore, RESTORE_OBJECTS=obj

or simply 


with the variable name of the object reference known.  This is most convenient
inside of an object method itself, when the object SAVE'd is called "self". The
current object ref "self" will be overwritten (think of self as a
pass-by-reference extra argument to all methods).  This can obviously be
dangerous, so be careful.