On Tue, 5 Feb 2002 14:12, Berin Loritsch wrote: > > Okay, I see what you had in mind now. However, it seems that the > > Container implementation (Processor in this example) still needs > > access to the child ComponentManager. So am I correct that the > > visibility of m_childManager in AbstractContainer needs to be > > changed from private to protected? > > > :/ > > Possibly, or maybe better a protected getter for the ComponentManager.
Maybe even a protected final getter ;) -- Cheers, Pete ------------------------------------ The two secrets to success: 1- Don't tell anyone everything. ------------------------------------ -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
