On Thu, 18 Nov 2010 14:25:40 +0100 Martijn Dashorst <martijn.dasho...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Relaxing the add() method has been proposed before (by Eelco). It is > not something new, and if it helps people using jrebel to improve > their productivity, that would be a great side effect. I agree it would be a good side effect, but not a change worth doing just for the benefit of JRebel :) - only if the change adds something worthwhile on its own. I just googled for Eelco's original proposal to give add() the semantics of addOrReplace(), since I didn't even know about that proposal. I agree with what you say about "final" and the clear semantics of add() and addOrReplace(). I like the fact that with the current semantics I can choose whether I want to definitely add (and get an exception in case of a bug) or whether I want to, well, add or replace :-) Usually I prefer a slight bit of additional typing over an ambiguous/unclear API. Maybe someone who uses JRebel (I don't) can ask the JRebel guys about better support for this. Carl-Eric www.wicketbuch.de
