"Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 18 Sep 2002, Henri Yandell wrote: > > > Date: Wed, 18 Sep 2002 11:57:52 -0400 (EDT) > > From: Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: Jakarta Commons Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: RE: [lang] Builders complete? > > > > > > I've no clear beliefs against it. I lack a good understanding of the whole > > of BeanUtils scope and size and I'm not sure whether this affects a Lang > > release. BeanUtils is one of those, I now know how to use, I will replace > > my own version, but I need to find out what it doesn't do that mine does > > and get inside it to feel good about it things :) > > > > In earlier discussions on this topic, I thought the conclusion was that > [lang] would grab the MethodUtils class out of beanutils, and create a > corresponding ConstructorUtils class for dynamically invoking > constructors. At some appropriate time, [beanutils] could deprecate its > own version of MethodUtils and declare a dependence on [lang] for this > functionality. > > The rest of [beanutils] seems to me to be out of scope for [lang].
+1 on this proposition. What say the rest of the [lang] commiters? -- Daniel Rall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
