On Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 9:49 AM, Jörn Kottmann<kottm...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Here's another (probably weak) use case for returning <T extends >> AbstractCas> kinds of things: If you have part of the code which >> collects views and some of these views use one form of the AbstractCas >> (e.g. CASImpl) and others use the JCas form, it would be nice to be able >> to put these two uses into a collection (of AbstractCas) - which is the >> kind of thing AbstractCas was trying to do, I believe. >> > > I never really understood the reason why AbstractCas exists, > it only has a release method, but CAS and JCas have many methods in > common. Why are they not declared in AbstractCas ? > > The way its now AbstractCas is nearly useless expect > for cas pooling or so. > > What was the reason to not move up the common methods > when AbstractCas was introduced ? >
We could move some things like getViewIterator up, but we should be careful that anything we move up would be applicable to any future CAS interface we might imagine, not just CAS and JCas. -Adam
