Thanks for that point.
so only make changes for the immediate problems for clarity.
for my own information.
would it be ok to provide a patch for the bug and also provide a patch
to update since I am looking at the module anyway.
or should we just have a refactoring jira to do that?
Adrian Crum sent the following on 7/24/2008 9:45 AM:
> BJ,
>
> In the example you used, I was fixing a bug, so I included only the
> changes needed to fix the bug. I could have updated the entire class to
> use the Java 5 Generics, but that would have obscured the changes needed
> to fix the bug.
>
> -Adrian
>
> BJ Freeman wrote:
>> Thanks I was seeing both in the commits so was not sure.
>>
>> Jacques Le Roux sent the following on 7/24/2008 6:17 AM:
>>> If you use an editor like Eclipse there are auto-completion suggestions
>>>
>>> 1) would be
>>> Map<String, Object> result = ServiceUtil.returnSuccess();
>>> 2) would be
>>> Map<String, Object> bodyParameters = (Map<String, Object>)
>>> serviceContext.remove("bodyParameters");
>>>
>>> A bit verbose, but this how things are going in Java, clearly its more
>>> secure. It's like when you are checking in on a plane : longer but,
>>> normally, safer...
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> From: "BJ Freeman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> I see this
>>>> - Map result = ServiceUtil.returnSuccess();
>>>> + Map<String, Object> result = ServiceUtil.returnSuccess();
>>>> and I see this
>>>>
>>>> + Map bodyParameters = (Map)
>>>> serviceContext.remove("bodyParameters");
>>>>
>>>> for the left side which is the best practice?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
