On Fri, 1 Mar 2002 23:01, Adam Murdoch wrote: > > Blech. Really don't like this. Complicates the task API for > > little benefit > > IMHO. > > How do you mean? The task API hasn't changed at all.
You have added an extra layer of inheritance which doesn't really buy us anything. Thats the main reason I made things it not extend Avalons Context. > > If we were going to bind to ants specific notiong of a > > context then we > > should bind directly to TaskContext. > > We're bound to a super-type of TaskContext. A very general super-type. > Nothing terribly Ant specific about it, except for the package it happens > to be sitting in at the moment. And the fact that it uses TaskException. > How is this any different to binding to an > avalon specific notion of a context? 2 uneeded methods. Direct tie to the Task API. If we are going to do this there is no point to having a super class because we may as well use TaskContext directly. -- Cheers, Pete ------------------------------------------ I just hate 'yes' men, don't you Smithers? ------------------------------------------ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
