> "Leo Luan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > The problem with getCreator returning a User object is that a Group could > > actually be the creator (e.g. system:administrators is the creator of > > system:administrators), and Java doesn't support covariant types. The > > underlying native library refers to the creator by name and id, and we > > found this useful; and the user of the API could determine whether it's a > > user or a group from the id and then construct the appropriate object with > > name if needed. > > Perhaps the way to do this is to define a "PtsEntry" Interface and have > both User and Group classes implement the PtsEntry Interface. Then the > getCreator method can return a PtsEntry. > > The reason for this approach is that users and groups do have similar > actions that can be done, but it's certainly true that there are > differences, too. However, it's clear that you could generalize a > common Interface and use that to share method interfaces for return > values. > > -derek
And if we ever get our act together here and submit the PTS groups-within-groups code to OpenAFS, there may be even less difference between users and groups? K.C. _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
