I've tried adding a feature similar to the attr_accessor method found in Ruby to TclOO.
I have to admit that this is hacky at best, and not useful when not all your variables should be accessors, but it might serve as a starting point for others.
One thing I learned about TclOO is that it's very hard to add new methods to oo::define. After reading the source a bit I found that it uses a special stack frame.
This way it tries to restrict usage of its commands within a single stack level, which is impossible to use with uplevel.
I'm very skeptical about the need for such a restriction, given that it will lead to hacks similar to this one. It's definitely possible right now to execute oo::define commands within the oo::define script, so the restriction is weak at best. What would be needed for easy Pure-Tcl extensions of TclOO is availability of the class name or allowing uplevel into the stack frame.
PYK 2013-04-18: edited code syntax to improve robustness, and added [uplevel] command, which may be exactly what dkf's comment below was referring to
#! /bin/env tclsh package require TclOO proc oo::define::accessor args { set class [lindex [uplevel info level 0] 1] ::oo::define $class variable {*}$args foreach {name} $args { ::oo::define $class method $name {} [string map [list \$name $name] {return [set $name]}] ::oo::define $class method $name= {new} [string map [list \$name $name] {return [set $name $new]}] } } oo::class create Person { accessor first last method name {} { return [list [my first] [my last]] } } set person [Person new] $person first= John $person last= Doe puts [$person name] ;# => John Doe
DKF: The restriction on oo::define's magic is because the context (i.e., the class being modified) is stored as a special field in the stack frame. This is a little odd in some senses, but means that nesting one oo::define inside another (referring to different classes) will work exactly as expected, with zero surprises. And it's probably easier to use “uplevel 1 [list method ...]” instead of what you're doing here.
Another way to write accessors. Builds on the above, but a little more concise:
proc oo::define::attr {access args} { set class [lindex [info level -1] 1] ::oo::define $class variable {*}$args if {"reader" in $access} { foreach name $args { ::oo::define $class method $name {} [format {set %s} $name] } } if {"writer" in $access} { foreach name $args { ::oo::define $class method $name= v [format {set %s $v} $name] } } } interp alias {} ::oo::define::attr_reader {} ::oo::define::attr reader interp alias {} ::oo::define::attr_writer {} ::oo::define::attr writer interp alias {} ::oo::define::attr_accessor {} ::oo::define::attr {reader writer}
GeoffM: Here is my simple baseclass which makes all variables of an object derived from baseclass accessible. Provided you know its name.
package require TclOO oo::class create baseclass { constructor {} {} method set {name {value "-1.234e1234"}} { # access and set member variables. my variable $name ;# variable to be accessed if {$value != "-1.234e1234"} { set $name $value } else { set $name } } } # Example: oo::class create tile { superclass baseclass constructor {i m p} { my variable v1 my variable colour my variable picture set v1 $m set colour $p set picture $i } } # Exercise it: set a [tile new 1 2 3 ] set b [tile new 11 12 13 ] set c [tile new 9 8 7] $a set v1 ;# return value of v1 in object a $a set colour ;# etc etc $b set v1 ;# and so on $b set v1 123.456 ;# change value of v1 in object b $b set v1
Note that the method "set" is similar to set for plain variables. That is it sets a value or gets returns its value.
I chose the default string as "-1.234e1234" since it is meaningless, would interpret as a too small to represent number, and is unlikely to occur in any reasonable program.
DKF: Formally, that's a too-large-to-represent number with negative sign. Too small would be 123e-1234. Good choice though.