It has progressed past the "having to loop through instances to 'update' objects", its progressed to "having to write the list to loop through instances to 'update' objects"
I know it probably seems a backwards step, (and I might agree), but now I can hold the objects in any structure I feel like, without the overhead of the inherent list of B3d. Its one of the reasons ppl who have moved over say it takes longer.
As to putting the List in the object, "I would maintain the LIST externally, it does not appear to be a property of the TYPE if it is accessable and changeable outside the TYPE definition"
This is personal preferance, as I said, but Why is it changeable outside the Type? Only because you make it so. It would normaly only be used by Functions, but these can be functions of the type, and have no need to be global
I must admit that the "you mean there is no way in BMax to send or respond to events or messages...", came out of nowhere, and and on heart, I dont know what you mean.
If I want any part of the type to post a message, (for example NEW(), I can post a message from new
I know it probably seems a backwards step, (and I might agree), but now I can hold the objects in any structure I feel like, without the overhead of the inherent list of B3d. Its one of the reasons ppl who have moved over say it takes longer.
As to putting the List in the object, "I would maintain the LIST externally, it does not appear to be a property of the TYPE if it is accessable and changeable outside the TYPE definition"
This is personal preferance, as I said, but Why is it changeable outside the Type? Only because you make it so. It would normaly only be used by Functions, but these can be functions of the type, and have no need to be global
I must admit that the "you mean there is no way in BMax to send or respond to events or messages...", came out of nowhere, and and on heart, I dont know what you mean.
If I want any part of the type to post a message, (for example NEW(), I can post a message from new