on 9/13/2000 12:47 PM, "Fedor Karpelevitch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> Perhaps the OM generated classes should be called something
>> like "FooOMBase", and you could extend them to add your
>> functionality. That way (in theory) regenerating the OM
>> classes would not wipe out your changes.
>
> I was about to say the same. It looks much cleaner from any point of
> view.
>
> fedor.
I agree. +1
-jon
--
http://scarab.tigris.org/ | http://noodle.tigris.org/
http://java.apache.org/ | http://java.apache.org/turbine/
http://www.working-dogs.com/ | http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/
http://www.collab.net/ | http://www.sourcexchange.com/
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
