Hi Mathias, > What in "this would be a good opportunity to make this service a "new > style one" makes you believe that I proposed this as the *solution* of > the problem?
Perhaps the fact we talked about a *problem*? :) Sorry, seems I didn't get you right then. > I just asked for checking *if* a new service that should replace or > complement an old one also could be a "new style" service. In all cases which I encountered so far, it wasn't about a new service, but about extending an old one with additional information, so I'm unsure to which extent we talk past each other here. > I don't see any "old style" service that can't be converted to a > multiple inheritance interface. Beforehand: I'm a strong friend of multiple inheritance (MI), and always strive to use it where possible, when defining new API. Finally, it has some cool advantages when using this API, though some disadvantages when implementing it, but this is a one-time pain only. (There are a few of our old-style services which I'd really *love* to convert ...) However, there are a few downsides ... or facets which make it easier for an implementor to create downsides ... or special situations where MI doesn't have any concrete advantage IMO ... but I don't really want to open this Pandora's box now and here :), finally, the original topic is another one which I'm more interested in right now. Ciao Frank -- Frank Schönheit StarOffice/OpenOffice.org Base [EMAIL PROTECTED] +49 40 23 646 663 / +66663 Sun Microsystems Germany Hamburg, Nagelsweg 55 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
