Eelco Hillenius wrote:
True, it's been weighing the disadvantages vs the advantages, and so
far, ensuring that we wouldn't paint ourselves in the corner too
quickly won over flexibility.
To make this 'painless' though, we'd probably need a whole bunch of
interfaces. We've looked into moving to a more interface based
approach in the past for Wicket, but we concluded that it just got too
crazy, increasing the complexity of the API considerably, and had all
the disadvantages of interfaces over abstract classes (no guaranteed
behavior, everything has to be public and abstract). We might just
come to that same conclusion again.
It's good to know that when you reach the same conclusion it is a
deliberate one.
BTW, interfaces are useful for this, but not a necessity. Or am I the
only one thinking that (I seem to be... hmm...). More interfaces mean
even more scrolling through the I's in the javadoc, nooooo, lol.
Matthijs
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
