Nathan said: > second, the *very* least you can do is put the DateTool(Locale) constructor > back (and working correctly of course). there is absolutely nothing unsafe > about that when used as an application tool. that would at least allow me > to easily extend it to make a DateTool of my own that can be easily used as > a session or request tool. you went too far in your eagerness to make it > thread-safe as an application tool.
heh. i just realized i'm arguing against myself a bit here... %-) adding the ctor with a locale parameter does make it easy to extend and use as a request/session tool *if* we keep the combined factory/initialization approach (which i don't want to keep anymore) otherwise it doesn't help much. d'oh! guess i asked for that one by arguing..er..debating about too many things at once. if i have to choose between the two, i'd rather ditch the factory/initialization combo and find different way to satisfy both my desire for a flexible DateTool and Gabe's fears about thread-safety when DateTool is used as application scope. thinking.... Nathan Bubna [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
