Peter Donald wrote:
>On Tue, 1 Oct 2002 19:10, Leo Simons wrote:
>
>
>>>Any other comments?
>>>
>>>
>>This adds additional semantic meaning to the lookup key, modifying the
>>sm contract.
>>
>>
>
>nope. See other mail - it adds meaning to the type not the lookup key.
>
>
>
>>What if I have an application deployed in phoenix 4.0 that just happens
>>to postfix about half of its components with "#"? It will break in the
>>next release.
>>
>>
>
>False. It is an impossible contract as previously they were interpreted as
>pure classnames in which case both [] and # were not viable within phoenix.
>
>
Now that's incorrect.
That is absolutely not criteria that states that a lookup key is an
interface class name.
Steve.
>
>
--
Stephen J. McConnell
OSM SARL
digital products for a global economy
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.osm.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
