On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Henry Rich<[email protected]> wrote: > I can paper over this by defining socket_handler_z_, but I suggest that > for Eric to make the call to socket_handler_base_ would be a better > solution.
I think this would be a bad change. The current approach lets you define an object which encapsulates socket activity. Your suggestion would prevent this kind of encapsulation. The workaround for your situation would seem to be to arrange so that your code which starts some socket activity always does so in the appropriate class. This might be as simple as arranging for a well defined entry point to your socket initialization code. But maybe I am mistaken? Thanks, -- Raul ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For information about J forums see http://www.jsoftware.com/forums.htm
