Hi Stephan, > I know, I know. > > Thinking once again about it, a cheap peace offering
uh, sorry for the rant then - it wasn't intended as declaration of war :) > could be the > introduction of an "extensible" keyword for interfaces and the concept > of interface ownership: > > - You must not implement objects that have an extensible interface > unless you are the owner of that interface (that implies that you must > not introduce service or singleton specifications that implement that > interface, either again unless you're the owner, right? > ). > > - You cannot inherit other interfaces from an extensible interface. except other extensible interfaces? > - The owner of an extensible interface can add members to its end > (inherited interfaces, methods, attributes). Why at the end only? Do we gain something with this restriction, and do we gain it in *all* language bindings, or would some bindings "break" regardless of it? > Not completely thought through, but should probably work. How does that > sound? Like a great first step towards a living API, which is fun to design, without feeling blocked unnecessarily. Thanks & Ciao Frank -- - Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - Sun Microsystems http://www.sun.com/staroffice - - OpenOffice.org Base http://dba.openoffice.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
