Jody Garnett ha scritto: > Andrea Aime wrote: >>> This will be a problem we have whenever we upgrade our code to a new >>> specification (or in this case meet the existing one). We would be >>> better advised to have StyleVistior implemented as an abstract class; >>> or at the very least have implementations get in the habit of >>> extending a "StyleVisitorAdapater". >> Hmm... not sure that would have been any good. The only reason >> I noticed that the style duplicator and the attribute duplicator >> had been broken was because of a compile error in geoserver, >> and I got that exactly because we don't extend a base class. >> >> The base class would just hide these errors, just like the >> mock implementations of those methods are. I prefer to stand >> up the errors and fix them instead of hiding them below the carpet. > Oh I see; so has the style duplicating visitor(s) been fixed up as part > of GeoTools? I often extend those (and override a few specific methods > in order to perform a "transform" of the origional style)...
Nope, it has not been fixed, as I stated in my first mail, the compiler has been made happy by adding stub methods that do not duplicate anything (making the class not work at all if a raster symbolizer is encountered). Same goes for all other implementors of StyleVisitor, only stub methods. Cheers Andrea ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
