Peter Donald wrote: > On Tue, 27 Aug 2002 17:28, Nicola Ken Barozzi wrote: > ... On The need for Context subclasses ... > >>I don't understand, sorry. >>As I said above, any cast to a context is a big mistake IMO. >>Please explain why you nead methods. > > > The explanation to this is no different from the last two times I have > explained this exact same point to you. I thought you conceded it was > necessary last time? Or have you come up with a solution for the problem?
Oh, I forgot this. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=avalon-dev&m=102559159916800&w=2 It seems to indicate that there is no real need for initial cast from the Context acquired. " From: Peter Donald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> At 08:04 AM 7/2/2002 +0200, you wrote: >ie is it good practice to do in contextualize(Context context) > > MYContext mc = (MYContext) context; I prefer this option - for no real good reason except that I find it easier to use. >? > >Or to do > > MYContext mc = context.get(MY_CONTEXT); Another option. " -- Nicola Ken Barozzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] - verba volant, scripta manent - (discussions get forgotten, just code remains) --------------------------------------------------------------------- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
