Niclas Hedhman wrote: > On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Edward Yakop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Another question is, doesn't this cglib import is an implementation detail. >> And what happened if somebody want to use some 3rd party jar >> interfaces to be one of their >> composite mixin. Wouldn't they need to rebundle that jar and add >> import net.sf.cglib.proxy package? > > Hmmm.... First of all I suggest that we find out the underlying reason > in CGLib, and then speculate on what is really going on. Guessing in > the dark is not something I like.
Also in all of this note that CGLIB is indeed an implementation detail, and one that would be great to remove. If we had another more lightweight way of implementing subclassing for abstract fragments, I would be most happy. /Rickard _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
