Richard O. Hammer wrote:
> This is valid source as far as the Java language is concerned.
> InetNetwork is not an inner class, but rather is another class
> in the same package.
Correct.
> While it is customary to put each class in its own file
> this is not required by Java standards.
Unnecessary for what is currently just a helper class in that package. See
JLS 6.6.4.
> But, from scanning the Exception message which you attach, this
> practice seems to violate a design assumption of Avalon.
Actually, no. What I've seen is that the class somehow gets built into
build/classes, but is not copied into the packaging. Anytime I have seen
this, doing a build.sh clean followed by a rebuild clears it up.
> I suspect you could make InetNetwork into an inner class simply
> by moving the closing brace of class NetMatcher down below the
> closing brace of InetNetwork. That might fly, and might even
> have been intended, if no class but NetMatcher uses reference
> to InetNetwork.
No, that would be bad. InetNetwork does not want an enclosing instance.
Stephen was correct that if it were to be an inner class (which it did not
need to be, but harms none in James and handles the packaging bug), it
should be static.
-- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
