You can just build a utility class instead then...
Maybe you could provide a bit more context if I'm still not getting it.
Tom
On 30/10/2013 16:41, mark goldin wrote:
That means I will have to modify existing code that references this object.
That is what I am trying to avoid.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 11:33 AM, Tom Chiverton <[email protected]> wrote:
You could give your object a method that returns an object of the other
type, and populate the properties as you like.
Tom
On 30/10/2013 15:42, mark goldin wrote:
Is it possible to make an object of a some type exposing itself as of
another type without casting?
Extending Proxy is what I need to look into?
Thanks
______________________________**______________________________**
__________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________**______________________________**
__________
______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service.
For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
______________________________________________________________________
