Justin Deoliveira wrote: >Hmmmm, well the whole reason for the second method is to make sure that >implementations do not make assumptions about what the return value >should look like. So all the work should really be done in >evaluate(Object), and then just converted on the fly by >evaluate(Object,Class). Making the method final enforces this nicley :). > >Can you give a more concrete example of what you need to do. If need be >we can break out a protected methods call eval( Object, Class ), which >does what evaluate( Object, Class ) does now, and then allow the latter >to be overridden by subclasses. > > Meh.... on second thought it makes more sense to simply have 2 different expressions rather than one that returns completely different objects depending on the context.
Ramble, ramble... ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
