how should a console be implemented

[Void Mapper]

I made a console using win32 controls but I'm not sure how to implement it. I had the idea of making a pure static class because I can't think of a situation where I would need multiple console windows. Does anyone have any better ideas?

[adikid89]

I can think of many cases where you need multiple consoles. Don't makes it static. Make some base class, and virtual the functions you'll probably change in other consoles, like parseComand() or something.

[D-e-X]

I can think of many cases where you need multiple consoles. Don't makes it static. Make some base class, and virtual the functions you'll probably change in other consoles, like parseComand() or something.

I'm going to have to agree with adikid89 here, making a "pure static class" is rarily necessary or good design. For example, you can have two consoles, having them to be able to pass information to each other would be a nifty little thing for example, which would need you to pass a pointer or reference to another console object.

At all, being able to instantiate more than one console is seldom "bad", it totally depends on what you want to do with it, or need. :]

[N64vSNES]

I don't really understand, I didn't think you could have a "pure static class". You mean a singleton? If you don't need more instances then just don't create any more.

[adikid89]

I think he means by "pure static" a class that only has static members/methods.

[N64vSNES]

I think he means by "pure static" a class that only has static members/methods.

Oh I see.

I don't think this is needed, just have a single instance and pass it by reference.

[pubby8]

If you are ever doing enough console writing to demand use of multiple windows, then you should not be using default windows console as you have outgrown it.

I will reccommend you write a simple class that creates a new window and another one that lets you write into it. Then you can create a single global-scoped version of the window, and create writers when needed (or globally).

I think he means by "pure static" a class that only has static members/methods.

Oh I see.

I don't think this is needed, just have a single instance and pass it by reference.

You wouldn't pass a class that contains all statics (monostate) by reference.

[adikid89]

I think he means by "pure static" a class that only has static members/methods.

Oh I see.

I don't think this is needed, just have a single instance and pass it by reference.

You wouldn't pass a class that contains all statics (monostate) by reference.

He didn't say the class should be all static.. in fact he was referring to make a class without statics, and just pass that one by reference.

[N64vSNES]

If you are ever doing enough console writing to demand use of multiple windows, then you should not be using default windows console as you have outgrown it.

I will reccommend you write a simple class that creates a new window and another one that lets you write into it. Then you can create a single global-scoped version of the window, and create writers when needed (or globally).

I think he means by "pure static" a class that only has static members/methods.

Oh I see.

I don't think this is needed, just have a single instance and pass it by reference.

You wouldn't pass a class that contains all statics (monostate) by reference.

Read what I said.

[pubby8]

If you are ever doing enough console writing to demand use of multiple windows, then you should not be using default windows console as you have outgrown it.

I will reccommend you write a simple class that creates a new window and another one that lets you write into it. Then you can create a single global-scoped version of the window, and create writers when needed (or globally).

I think he means by "pure static" a class that only has static members/methods.

Oh I see.

I don't think this is needed, just have a single instance and pass it by reference.

You wouldn't pass a class that contains all statics (monostate) by reference.

Read what I said.

Oh, I misread.

[Falco Girgis]

If you are ever doing enough console writing to demand use of multiple windows, then you should not be using default windows console as you have outgrown it.

I will reccommend you write a simple class that creates a new window and another one that lets you write into it. Then you can create a single global-scoped version of the window, and create writers when needed (or globally).

I think he means by "pure static" a class that only has static members/methods.

Oh I see.

I don't think this is needed, just have a single instance and pass it by reference.

You wouldn't pass a class that contains all statics (monostate) by reference.

Read what I said.

Oh, I misread.

[Void Mapper]

If you are ever doing enough console writing to demand use of multiple windows, then you should not be using default windows console as you have outgrown it.

I will reccommend you write a simple class that creates a new window and another one that lets you write into it. Then you can create a single global-scoped version of the window, and create writers when needed (or globally).

I think he means by "pure static" a class that only has static members/methods.

Oh I see.

I don't think this is needed, just have a single instance and pass it by reference.

You wouldn't pass a class that contains all statics (monostate) by reference.

I'm not using the windows console. The console I'm working is made up of one parent window and two edit controls.