Re: [weld-dev] Decorator question
Look, I just don't see the usecase for what you're proposing.
If you're trying to extend a concrete class, override some of its
methods, and delegate some methods back to the superclass, just make
your subclass an @Alternative and call super.
I simply don't see the usecase for having a whole stack of these
things. I don't think anyone needs this.
On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Mark Struberg <struberg(a)yahoo.de> wrote:
But if (2) is allowed, then the restriction on the Interfaces is
pretty restrictive. I cannot see any additional benefit we gain from this restriction and
we have to delegate all not-overridden methods via a proxy anyway.
Can you please give me a hint why this is necessary?
txs and lieGrue,
strub
--- Gavin King <gavin.king(a)gmail.com> schrieb am Fr, 4.12.2009:
> Von: Gavin King <gavin.king(a)gmail.com>
> Betreff: Re: [weld-dev] Decorator question
> An: "Marius Bogoevici" <mariusb(a)redhat.com>
> CC: "Mark Struberg" <struberg(a)yahoo.de>, weld-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
> Datum: Freitag, 4. Dezember 2009, 1:56
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 6:44 PM,
> Marius Bogoevici <mariusb(a)redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
> > a) You can still have (2), if AnotherBeanClass
> implements an interface
> > AnInterface. It's just that the set of decorated
> methods is restricted to
> > the ones defined in the interface.
>
> Actually, yes, that's true. I should have said that.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Sie sind Spam leid? Yahoo! Mail verfügt über einen herausragenden Schutz gegen
Massenmails.
http://mail.yahoo.com
--
Gavin King
gavin.king(a)gmail.com
http://in.relation.to/Bloggers/Gavin
http://hibernate.org
http://seamframework.org