> On 2/15/07, Timo Rantalaiho <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >While you're at it, should IBehavior be generic (with a > >type parameter T extends Component instead of Component) in > >2.0? > On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Eelco Hillenius wrote: > I don't know. That would bound behaviors to one component (which is > the common case now, but not something the interface enforces are - > imo - should enfore). And besides that, what do you think would be the > advantage to that?
Hmm... I thought that there were some methods in IBehavior that implied that there was a single component attached to it, but probably not then. Are ajax behaviors more strictly for one component per behavior instance? I ran into this with Ajax behaviors that have the public Component getComponent() method, and sometimes with a deep component hierarchy it would be clearer to have a more specific return type than Component. I don't know if there would be real advantage beyond that (and avoiding casting). - Timo -- Timo Rantalaiho Reaktor Innovations Oy <URL: http://www.ri.fi/ >
