> > > >This way all the base classes can share methods _and_ properties ... or > > >am I missing something? > > > > How will they share properties? Maybe I didn't understand your idea. > > Well, for instance, I hate Arial and put an user-definable (via a public > variable which will once be read from an .ini or registry) font. I have > to do it in _all_ the classes I make. I haven't worked out yet how to do > it for grids, without having to SetAll() in grid's show event - I'd like > to have a Column/Header/Cell class. > Yesssss. Such a thing even exists in Excell! > Now suppose I want to change it for all the classes. Real OOP would be > to go upstream to the highest class definition in the class hierarchy - > and there's none. You have a dozen of them, each with its own set of > defaults (some of them far away from my taste). > > I guess it'll come down to writing a routine to scan my .vcx, cram some > "Property=value" lines into memo fields and recompile the .vcx. For Grids, I think the Builder approach is the most appropriate (My 2 BEF). Another > guess: if in that way I create properties which never existed in some of > the base classes, but will exist in my classes, no harm will be done - > just there will be no code to react upon the change of these properties. Yes but if you add the Behaviour.property and instantiate it as a Behaviour Class in the Init of the base classes, you could achieve this by updating the Behaviour class only once, and copy certain values to the corresponding values of the parent. Regards, Marc