DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG· RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32691>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND· INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=32691 ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-12-14 13:52 ------- >Having redundant methods with varying numbers of Object params, to "emulate" >varargs functionality may be effective, but it's also butt-ugly. :-) I agree entirely, its a great shame that such a language feature as varargs comes at a late stage. If the bytecode is backwards compatible (ie can compile varargs on JRE5 and run on JRE1.3) then this would be acceptable for me but would it be acceptable to all commons-logging users? They would be forced to move to JDK5 for development but many companies will be holding back. Possibly you could release a seperate pre and post JRE5 interface but that would be extra work for your release manager. I think commons-logging should give the benefit to the user of removing butt- ugly code from the users applications by taking that upon themselves. Good encapsulation I would expect to hide that ugly stuff. Interesting link to Just4Log. I must confess to being a bit wary of byte-code manipulators. What else could it be putting in there for me? I'd have to read the entire soucre base and swot up on byte code format to know. Then again the same could be said of any 3rd party library I guess. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
