IMHO package protected class is the way to go, much less brittle.
With that in mind I put in the necessary change (r6976) along with a number of minor fixes to the samples. If anyone disagrees, feel free to unpatch the code ;) On 19/06/07, David Leangen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I happen to agree with Efy... but hey, he's the one supporting this. ;-) On Mon, 2007-06-18 at 21:30 +0800, Edward Yakop wrote: > > See the forwarded message from Equinox dev list. > > > > So there are two choices; > > 1. package protected class > > 2. override with delegation to parent on all public methods. > > > > I'm kind of more Ok with 2. but willing to go with 1. if someone > > provide a good argument for it. > > Package protected class is less error prone to 2. > > Number 2. requires that we have to ensure all public methods are not > final (not a fan of this) and all child classes must have these public > methods must be override. Another problem is how are we going to test > for this? This only happens in eclipse, does that mean we have to > create some test classes outside the service bundle and just create > new instance of the relevant classes and call every single methods? > > Regards, > Edward Yakop > > _______________________________________________ > general mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general _______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
-- Cheers, Stuart
_______________________________________________ general mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/general
