Right you are - I misunderstood what was being proposed. I agree that
splitting the JCas impl code into interface / impl would be a good idea
and wouldn't impact things too much.
-Marshall
Adam Lally (JIRA) wrote:
[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-10?page=comments#action_12449444 ]
Adam Lally commented on UIMA-10:
--------------------------------
I'm not seeing why making JCas an interface would require users to change their code.
That would be the case if we changed the generated "JCas cover classes" to be
interfaces, but that wasn't the intention of this issue.
Split JCas into interface and implementation
--------------------------------------------
Key: UIMA-10
URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/UIMA-10
Project: UIMA
Issue Type: Improvement
Components: Core Java Framework
Reporter: Adam Lally
Assigned To: Marshall Schor
We should split the existing JCAS class into an interface
org.apache.uima.jcas.JCas and its implementation
org.apache.uima.jcas.impl.JCasImpl. This follows good design practices and
also is consistent with the rest of uimaj-core. It is important to do this
prior to our first release since it will be a non-compatible change for user
code.
