Hi Sanjiva,
I'm on a long flight right now .. so it could be that my head is not
working right ...
8-)
but I can't figure out why one would need a String to Object type
convertor?? Can you elaborate a bit please?
Well, I was surprised about it too. Here is the scoop of it: while
working on a scripting interface for OpenOffice.org for ooRexx
(http://www.ooRexx.org) using BSF I stumbled over a simple problem: they
have a generic "PropertyValue" class which uses Strings as keys and
"Object" as type. In my implementation of the scripting engine I rely on
the typeconvertor for the primitive datatypes, their Java class
counterparts and the class String.
Of course, I could take care of this situation in my engine
implementation, but figured that maybe others are relying on the BSF
type convertors and to solve this particular problem, the addition of
String.class->Object.class would suffice.
So for that reason I am asking whether someone objects for one reason or
the other.
Regards,
---rony
P.S.: Another candidate would be "byte[]-->String", "char[]--->String",
and maybe vice-versa. Didn't tackle or suggest this as of yet. What
would you think of this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
