> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Brian Jones
>
> Stuart Ballard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > FWIW, I strongly agree with John about protected classes. Protected
> > members of a class *ARE* part of the public API in Java.
>
> ClassLoader from 1.2 has a number of protected member functions which
> are documented via javadoc. I don't think we can create a compatible
> implementation without these functions. Paul, do you agree?
>
No, it's protected classes that are under debate. Everyone agrees that we
need to include protected members. (At least I hope they do. If they don't
they need a good bit of slappin' around.)
--John Keiser
