DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26980>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26980 XMLStringPool is not useful as a base class [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX ------- Additional Comments From [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2004-02-16 19:27 ------- Hi Dave. XMLStringPool was never designed to be the base class for anything. The only class I'm aware of that inherits from it is XMLSynchronizedStringPool, which we needed for thread-safe grammars. When I created XMLSynchronizedStringPool, I made the minimum possible amount of change to XMLStringPool; which is why things look a little awkward. The main reason XMLStringPool was supposed to be concrete was performance, to avoid virtual calls. I only made methods virtual that absolutely needed to be virtual, and only made data members protected that absolutely needed to be protected. So it's not so easy to override--but it wasn't spposed to be. :) As to making an interface and a concrete implementation: I'd really worry about preserving source-code compatibility; the moment we have pure virtual methods, new XMLStringPool will break--and it's not at all unreasonable to think there are folks who use the class in this way. So I don't think we can address this one. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
