Patrik Reali wrote: > --On Freitag, 5. M�rz 2004 08:13 +1000 David Holmes > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > As previously mentioned I think VMClass would be better defined as a > > helper with static methods rather than a shadow object > attached to each > > Class instance. > > >From my own experience, I can only agree with this... > > (not much to say, but I really wanted to say it)
Since I seem to be the only one that actually wants a VMClass instance, maybe we can agree on a slightly different interface. How about keep a reference to a VMClass instance in Class, but not calling any instance methods on VMClass, but using static methods instead (always passing the Class reference along). Does that make sense? Regards, Jeroen _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
