Hey yeah, I think your right! It *still* may be a little heavy, but one would definitely think less so. Off to play for a few minutes...
-- Frank W. Zammetti Founder and Chief Software Architect Omnytex Technologies http://www.omnytex.com AIM: fzammetti Yahoo: fzammetti MSN: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, February 16, 2006 3:29 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > Michael Jouravlev replied >> On 2/16/06, Frank W. Zammetti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > In the method you want to "protect", immediately throw an exception >> > and catch it. Then, parse the stack trace and see who the >> caller was. >> > If it's not a class you want to have access to the method, throw an >> > IllegalAccessException. >> >> I guess it can be costly if the callers are mostly the ones >> that you want to allow access to. On the other hand, I don't >> know the metrics on how costly is to create and throw an exception. > > I don't think you'd have to throw and catch it. I think it's sufficient > to create an instance of Throwable to check the stack trace. > > - George > http://www.idiacomputing.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
