On Sat, 2005-11-19 at 14:44 -0500, James Carman wrote: > Per the suggestions from the group, I changed ProxyFactory to be a concrete > class rather than an interface (I don't like it, but it will be easier to > change in the future). Now, ProxyFactory is essentially the > reflection-based implementation of the old interface. Subclasses will > override the methods to provide more efficient proxies (like the CGLIB and > Javassist ones do).
interesting :) this will allow for future expansion without breaking binary or semantic compatibility. so, that's sorted... it might be a good idea to add some more commentary about this decision to the class (to avoid discussions later). > Anyway, aside from changing the proposal a bit, I think > that was the last thing on my list for things I needed to do before proxy > could be ready for a release candidate. Can a few of you more seasoned open > source gurus take a look at the new API and let me know if that will work > better? unfortunately, only time will tell whether it'll work better. i can only tell you about the mistakes we've made in the past... once you've tuned the proposal a little, i'd say that you're about ready for a promotion vote :) - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
