> Not that I want to spend time on any of this, but I would rather > eliminate a ton of our d* classes that are not what we would 'expose' > as the Dabo Base Classes to a developer coming to the framework. If > they would never use it directly in an app, or subclass it, then it > shouldn't be d*. > > -- Ed Leafe
I'd still like to see some identifier that said "this is a Dabo Class". And just using a leading "_" inplace of the 'd' does not say Dabo. -- John Fabiani _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/dabo-dev Searchable Archives: http://leafe.com/archives/search/dabo-dev This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
