On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Peter Donald wrote: > On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 04:41, giacomo wrote: > > Just a dumb question: Is the role implemented by the BundleSelector > > different than that of ExcaliburComponentSelector (I thought that > > subclasses don't have to change the role of the super class as they > > implement the same role)? > > Well technically classes should not have a ROLE string. Only interfaces have a > ROLE and all implementations of interface share same ROLE. So neither > ExcaliburComponentSelector nor BundleSelector should define ROLE IMHO.
:) So why did the author/changer of BundleSelector choose to set a different ROLE (that's what I was looking to get an answer for) Giacomo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
