You can define separate bindings for the combinations of A+B+C vs. A+B+D, and as long as you compile these bindings at the same time you should have no problem - A+B will be bound one way in binding1, the other way in binding2. If that's not what you're looking for please clarify and I'll see what I can suggest.
- Dennis
Venkatesh Prasad Ranganath wrote:
Hi,
Class A contains a collection of objects that provide Interface B. Class A has a JiBX mapping.
Both class C and D implement B and both have a JiBX mapping.
The issue is I can "connect" the mapping of C and A. Similarly, I can "connect" the mapping of B and A. However, the A class resulting in both cases will not be compatible. In short I cannot use the JiBXed A class from scenario one in scenario two.
Any clues, solution, pointers?
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
jibx-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jibx-users
