>Sounds like a reason to subclass ChainBase for your own chain
>implementations.
yep - I've taken your advice there :)
>It's definitely internal. From the outside, you should think of a
>Chain as a *Command*, not a chain.
>...
>internally implemented as a chain or not is irrelevant to users --
>that's an implementation detail.
ok, your logic makes a lot more sense to me now :)
>So you propose to make it *public* instead *package protected*? That
>doesn't seem like an improvement.
No, I think I was suggesting more that the author of chain (you) and I
have a different mindset in this area - rather than a proposal to change
anything!
I was making a general comment about writing tests that were
directly examining the internal state of a class rather than than
examining the effects that state has on the class' external behaviour.
However, I'm not an automated testsuite-writing guru, so I'm not
going to try and start a thread on how everybody should write their test
cases like me :)
{especially when I'm not a committer & have no shining public
examples of code to point to.....}
>-1 on this proposed change, for the reasons discussed on this thread.
fair enough. Subclassing it is then! :)
Thanks for clearing that up for me. There endith another thread!
matthew
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
