Go for it. In general, I don't want to focus on such detail oriented things just yet. Figure we'll change this around a couple times.
Locally, my OperationPtg is an Abstract class inheriting from the PTG class. There will also likely be a "FunctionPtg" abstract class. I'd prefer if you wait until after we get the branch though so that I can commit. (Should happen in about 12 hours or so when Glen is awake.) Avik Sengupta wrote: >Can i suggest that we make Ptg an interface, and have an AbstractPtg class. > >Seems rather incongrous to me that OperationPtg, being a subset of ptg, should >be an interface, while Ptg is a class. > >If there are no objections, i will make a patch. > >Regards >- >Avik >
