good idea, I will refactor that.
Filip
Remy Maucherat wrote:
Costin Manolache wrote:
Of course, this is a case where you need a separate module.
IMHO it is a bad sign when you have to do this - maybe you could use a
different
package name instead of same class names, or refactor a bit so you
don't depend
on the class name.
But if for any reason you have to use the same classname, then use a
different module for
that code. JDK does this for platform-specific things in IO, awt, etc.
I think this should be the exception, not the rule.
Right, I favor using different package names too in this sort of
situation.
Rémy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
