Since ActionContext is an interface, we'd have to do something like this:
public static final ThreadLocal currentInstance = new ThreadLocal();
Is it too weird to have this as a public member? Is there some artful way to hide it more? Of course, we'd have
public static void setCurrentInstance(ActionContext ctx)
and
public ActionContext getCurrentInstance()
but I'm sketched out at having to leave the member itself public.
That said, I'm still happier with ActionContext as an interface than an abstract class.
Any words of wisdome, or should I just go ahead and do this?
Joe
-- Joe Germuska [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blog.germuska.com "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
