On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 8:19 PM, John Tamplin <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 2:16 PM, Tom <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I have some questions and proposals around the JsArray-classes because >> they are handy when working with JSNI but I believe they could be >> improved a bit. >> >> a) Why are not all native methods provided through the wrapper. > > One problem is that given how JSOs work, using a name on a parent class > means no subclass can have a method of that name. Thus, you want to be very > careful about adding methods to a JSO class that is intended to be > subclassed. > A reasonable option would be to add a final subclass which does have those > methods, and you can freely cast any JSO to that class when you need to use > those methods.
Thanks for your response. You are right. I didn't thought about the fact that someone could have already subclassed this base implementation and would be broken with such a changes. Anyways I'd volunteer to implement the needed classes if you decide that this is a good idea. -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
