+1
I'd rather we start with less.
-Elias
James M Snell wrote:
> The key improvement is that this refactoring eliminates a large number
> of fairly redundant methods. That said, the goal should be to make the
> most common cases as easy as possible. To that end, having
> setContentAsHtml(string), setContentAsXhtml(string) method makes sense.
> I'll make sure those stay in.
>
> - James
>
> Garrett Rooney wrote:
>> On 6/22/06, James M Snell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Thoughts? Complaints? Concerns before I check it in?
>> I'm honestly not sure it's a huge improvement in useability. You end
>> up typing a lot more this way (setFooAsXhtml("blah") ->
>> setFoo(Content.Type.XHTML, "blah")), and instead of distinct methods
>> that do different things you've got methods with the same name that do
>> potentially different things. How is this a step forward again?
>>
>> -garrett
>>
>
