On Dec 22, 2004, at 3:33 PM, Ceki G�lc� wrote:
Curt,
Just looked at the code. It answered my question regarding the setOption1, ..., setOptionN. Just use an aggregated data type instead of a simple one.
I propose the following clean up would make the code in PatternConverter simpler.
- Remove the setOption method
- Change PatternConverter.setOptions to be implemented as {}, i.e. NOP.
- Change sub-classes of PatternConverter dealing with options override the NOP implementaton in PatternConverter.setOptions.
OK?
I was hesitant to do that if there were external pattern converters that would be broken by the change. But if that isn't a concern, then by all means.
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
