[jdom-interest] Fast Factory

[Rolf Lear]

How many sub-classers are there out there?

Show of hands anyone?

Just to prove a point, there is no reason why you can't accomplish with a
manipulation of the class-path what can be accomplished by subclassing. I
did it to test the FastFactory ... put my own jar ahead of the existing jdom
jar, with the same package structure.

Basically, my question is this: how much weight should we give to the
subclassers in our design - they don't like it already otherwise they would
not be sub-classing.

I am struggling to think of circumstances where sub-classing makes sense.

Rolf

-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Hunter [mailto:jhunter at acm.org]
Sent: Monday, May 26, 2003 10:13 PM
To: Bradley S. Huffman
Cc: jdom-interest at jdom.org
Subject: Re: [jdom-interest] Fast Factory


>>Seems like the only difference is whether you leave the data fields
>>protected or rely on a create() call, and since there's no diff it
>>seems better to leave the data fields protected so subclassers can
>>better utilize them.
> 
> 
> Okay then it would make sense to find a way to make content and attributes
> "protected List" instead of "private" so subclassers could better utilize
> them also.
> 
> Brad

Or just rely on subclassers to define their own variable for holding 
content if they don't like how we do it.  As you pointed out, the 
current implementation basically relies on that being a ContentList, and 
we don't want to expose ContentList.

-jh-


_______________________________________________
To control your jdom-interest membership:
http://lists.denveronline.net/mailman/options/jdom-interest/youraddr@yourhos
t.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://jdom.org/pipermail/jdom-interest/attachments/20030527/4fad0eea/attachment.htm