On 8/10/11 2:10 AM, [email protected] wrote:
I think it would be much better, but we have different sample classes (one
for each tool) and no common parent. As far as I can see there is no way to
compare two samples without knowing the tool and it makes harder to
implement the monitor. That is way I avoided using the sample itself and
added 3 methods that covers different kinds of samples we have.
Ups, accidentally replied to the issues list.
You need to know the sample class, and since they do not have a common
parent you always need to write some custom code to extract the knowledge
from them. This code we have to write somewhere, now it is in the individual
evaluators, but it could also be moved to command line monitors.
Extracting this information in the evaluators itself, might be a bit
easier since
it is going through the samples anyway.
So going down this road might be a bit more work, but to me it looks
like the
solution is also much more useable.
Jörn
