So, is that a LGTM as-is, a request to move the now-separate classes into static nested ones, or a hold for more discussion?
On 2010/07/12 21:19:29, scottb wrote:
Actually, I may have jumped the gun on that. Making it static nested
will
have an impact on command line callers who are specifying a strategy
on the
command line, I think. (Separate discussion from whether we should
flog the
responsible parties for polluting the junit package directly.) :)
On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 5:18 PM, Scott Blum <mailto:[email protected]>
wrote:
> +1. Static nested FTW. :) > > > On Mon, Jul 12, 2010 at 5:14 PM, <mailto:[email protected]> wrote: > >> LGTM, though do all the *Strategy ones need to be top-level classes >> rather than static nested classes? >> >> >> >> http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/686801/show >> >> -- >> http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors >> > >
http://gwt-code-reviews.appspot.com/686801/show -- http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Web-Toolkit-Contributors
