Well, how averse are you to adding to the Context interface?
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> "Patrick E. Whitesell" wrote:
>
>> Hey fellas,
>>
>> I did some stuff to enchance the Context chaining. This is my first
>> submission, so let me know if I'm way out of line...
>>
>> There are some ugly bits in here due to the fact that the innerContext
>> is defined as a Context, not an AbstractContext. Does anyone object to
>> making the innerContext an AbstractContext? If not, I can take the
>> exceptions out of this code...
>
>
>
> And yes, w/o thinking much about it, my first reaction is that we want
> to keep it general as a Context, rather than the AbstractContext. This
> should keep things more flexible for chaining arbitrary contexts. At
> least that's the idea...
>
> geir
--
Patrick E. Whitesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
