"Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On 2/11/02 8:37 PM, "Daniel Rall" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> So the adapter wraps the resource loader. Formalizing the concept >> of an adaptive loader is it good idea. It draws on the existing >> Velocity configuraiton vocabulary and extends it, which is much >> better than introducing an entirely new entity (the new addition >> won't be as foreign to developers). I've gone ahead and checked in >> the code as two classes, LoaderAdapter and PathMapAdapter, which >> are two halves of the code seen below. I'm thinking that >> LoaderAdapter might be better named either ResourceLoaderAdapter or >> AdaptiveResourceLoader. Thoughts? > > Well, I kind of liked it in the package I put it, but that's minor.
It was already nested pretty deeply...and adapters are loaders. > What I really was getting at was to do something completely > different than this - but wanted to test the waters to see if this > would work for you. This works really well for me. What was it that you were getting at, maybe that would work even better? ;-) Dan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
