> -Original Message-
> From: Danny Angus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 06 July 2004 13:50
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: RE: User attribute support and API changes
>
>
>
>
>
> > I think this feels contrived, because I can't se
I could see implementation by delegation, and if we have a need for it, an
interface that specifies the an Attributes surface. So both of you are
correct, depending on the need we find. I don't see inheriting the
implementation, though.
Mind you, we want to be able to optimize this behavior. Fo
> I think this feels contrived, because I can't see the value in it, but I
> could be wrong.
I was confused by the name, "AttributeSupport" and initially thought
"AttributeManager" better described an object which managed a set of
attributes.
However I then wondered if you were perhaps trying
> -Original Message-
> From: Danny Angus [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 06 July 2004 09:53
> To: James Developers List
> Subject: Re: User attribute support and API changes
>
>
>
>
>
> What is your reasoning behind making attribute support a
What is your reasoning behind making attribute support a seperate interface
to Mail or User?
Do you see any benefit to be gained from this polymorphism of Mail and
User, or is this just a "tidy mind" encapsulation of a single pattern of
attribute support?
FWIW I'm not 100% sure about this, let
