I don't like mixing implementation and interface, but I don't feel like arguing now, so done.
-Bill On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 21:25 -0400, Glen Daniels wrote: > Hi Sanjiva, Bill: > > Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > > I know I +1'ed whatever approach but the approach of introducing a top > > level class for the return status looks ugly to me. If consts aren't > > good enough can't we at least shove this (static) class inside Handler? > > That way one returns Handler.InvocationResponse.CONTINUE_PROCESSING etc. > > which at least tells people immediately what it means. > > +1 to Sanjiva's suggestion. Removes the need for another import/file, > and from inside a Handler-derived class, you can actually still just > "return InvocationResponse.CONTINUE" (see below), which looks clean. > > I also like "InvocationResponse" *much* better than > "InvocationProcessingInstruction". And do we really need the > "_PROCESSING" suffix on CONTINUE/SUSPEND/ABORT? :) > > Yours for succinct code, > --Glen > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
