On Wed, 30 Jan 2002 07:12, Tim Dawson wrote: > I like the idea of polymorphic types, but I'm not sure about this type of > implementation - it requires that the type be a subclass of another type, > and would prohibit interface implementation from working. When I first ran > into a similar issue a while back I got to thinking that what would be a > better approach would be to pair this issue with the whole deployment > descriptor issue, and have each type optionally declare a "property" that > would be used to set it. (the DD issue comes into play because the third > declaration by necessity breaks the ability to use the simple properties > file to map the element name to the class)
What you have essentially described is the concept of a role from myrmidon. It is open to debate whether inherited roles/role-subtyping is a good idea or not and whether it should be up to original developer or dynamically determined by runtime. > Does the general idea though, of actually registering the property name > work for people? I think it seems fairly obvious, especially when the > default is to use the element name. I would be very surprised if it could be integrated into Ant1.x successfully or not but feel free to try. However I think that it was +1ed for Ant2 features. -- Cheers, Pete *------------------------------------------------------* | "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want | | to test a man's character, give him power." | | -Abraham Lincoln | *------------------------------------------------------* -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
