Gary, Would it meet testing needs to add a reloadSystemProperties() method that test-code can call after tweaking things? It seems like that would make testing easy without cluttering SystemUtils with setters (that perhaps shouldn't be used otherwise).
.T. On Fri, 13 Feb 2004 23:11:43 -0000, "Stephen Colebourne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > From: "Gary Gregory" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Do people really change these values? (other than in tests, which kinda > > > don't count...) > > > > My feeling is that is does not matter what /kind/ of call site uses (for > > example) SystemUtils, whether it is application code or unit test code. My > > application, in general terms, is the client/customer. What matters is > that > > [lang] provides the services that make my job of writing code > > easier/better/faster. > > The point I'm really driving at is where the limits of [lang] lie. There > is > no technical difficulty (other than its a bit boring) of adding get and > set > methods for each system property in addition to the constants. The > question > is whether it serves a big enough need. > > Maybe there is a large need to change environment variables, but I just > feel > a little unconvinced. Consider me -0 I guess. > > Stephen > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
