I'm all for that, just be careful that you keep the exact functionality. You may also want to look over the way that the new requests are created on RequestFailed, storing the class and then using the reflect methods like I did works, but is not very nice - having a RequestMaker object or something like that stored in the MM which has a method like:
public abstract Request newRequest(); might be nicer. Also, the way that RequestFaileds time out is very ugly - but be careful with that, it is important that it really creates a InsertReply on insert, and that it sends the reply in the right direction (ie, towards mm.origRec, not source). On Mon, 24 Apr 2000, Bill Trost wrote: > There is a lot of code duplication between RequestFailed.pReceived and > Request.pReceived. Does anyone see any reason not to make RequestFailed > a subclass of Request and share the code from there (or, better yet, > create a shared superclass from the both)? > > Unless I hear an objection, I think I will work on that this afternoon. > > _______________________________________________ > Freenet-dev mailing list > Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev -- Oskar Sandberg md98-osa at nada.kth.se #!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1 lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/) _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
