> From: Paul Fisher [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Paul Fisher
>
> "Aaron M. Renn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > We should be compatible because compatibility is a good thing, not
> > because we are afraid of Sun's bogus license.
>
> Ditto. But with an in-between class, are we still compatible?
>
I second that. Java has been specifically designed for binary compatibility
even if a class is placed in between ... can't remember exactly where I read
that, but it was important to the Joy and Co. This doesn't fall into what I
read as the definition of "supersetting or subsetting," since we are *not*
adding or removing any public functionality. I don't believe we are even
adding any private functionality! As long as we can add package-private
classes, we can do this.
The only way I see it messing things up is if Sun defines the inheritance
tree for all java.* objects and says everyone must conform to that strictly.
I say, go ahead and do it for now, and if someone bitches and moans, we
either fight or we just change it. It's not that big a deal to change, just
a few copy/pastes.
--John Keiser
