Jody Garnett ha scritto:
> On 14/06/2010, at 4:52 PM, Andrea Aime wrote:
>
>> Jody Garnett ha scritto:
Please don't add a layer.dispose() method, resources to be
disposed are harder to use so let's limit the usage of
dispose/close methods to cases where it's really necessary to
On 14/06/2010, at 4:52 PM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Jody Garnett ha scritto:
>>> Please don't add a layer.dispose() method, resources to be disposed
>>> are harder to use so let's limit the usage of dispose/close methods
>>> to cases where it's really necessary to do so (file, streams,
>>> database co
On 14/06/10 14:52, Andrea Aime wrote:
>>> I also see code that has just been commented out like in
>>> FeatureSourceMapLayer, bad practice... well, unless you noted down
>>> all the code that you've commented out and will remove it later.
>> That will be one of the last things I do; remember up to
Jody Garnett ha scritto:
>> Please don't add a layer.dispose() method, resources to be disposed
>> are harder to use so let's limit the usage of dispose/close methods
>> to cases where it's really necessary to do so (file, streams,
>> database connections and so on). Swing does not have a "dispose(
Thanks for the feedback Andrea! Some comments inline...
On 14/06/2010, at 6:18 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Map -> "really bad name" (tm), we should not clash with
> java own classes (yes, packages keep them apart,
> but code completion gets confusing)
Agreed.
Solution - I am thinkin
Hi,
I'm skimming through the proposal quickly and noting down
the things that do look odd.
Premise: the work looks sound and should clean up things
significantly. I like it, past some issues I'm going to
list in this mail.
Map -> "really bad name" (tm), we should not clash with
java own
