On 7/7/06, Oliver Heger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stephen Colebourne wrote:
<snip/>
>
> Oliver Heger wrote:
> > Fine with me, but could the return value of lookup be Object instead
> > of String? Especially if you want to use this interface in other
> areas, you might need more freedom. If only String processing needs
> > to be performed, the returned Object can be transformed to a String by
> > calling toString().
>
> But what kind of object are you expectng to be returned here (other than
> a String)?
>
> A similar question applies to the replaceObject() method which appears
> to have very odd semantics as you can't rely on the return value being
> of any specific type. What Objects are you expecting to work with?
>
> Stephen
>
I plan to use the class in [configuration] for variable substitution. A
variable can represent a configuration property, which can have an
arbitrary type.
Anything further on this thread? Any sign of consensus?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
