Re: [picocontainer-dev] Behaviour & generics

--- Mauro Talevi <[email protected]> wrote:

> Konstantin Priblouda wrote:
> > ---------------%<-------------
> >     T getDelegate();
> > 
> >     <U> U getDelegate(Class<U>
> componentAdapterType);
> > ---------------%<-------------
> > 
> > Schould'nt it be:
> > 
> > ---------------%<-------------
> >     ComponentAdapter<T> getDelegate();
> > 
> >     <U> U getDelegate(Class<U extends
> > ComponentAdapter> componentAdapterType);
> > ---------------%<-------------
> > 
> > 
> 
> It's still work in progress.
> 
> For one thing, I'd like to remove the first method
> altogether.

Actual variant seems to be just wrong, and if there 
was no explosion in our 500+ unit tests it surely
never used. 

> The second method signature modification you propose
> is fine by me, although I've been trying to see 
> if it can be restricted to Behaviour types instead
> of CA types.

I do not grok puprose of it....


Well, if nobody protests I will also genericalise
where appropriate ( all tests still run ;) ) 
regards,

----[ Konstantin Pribluda http://www.pribluda.de ]----------------
JTec quality components: http://www.pribluda.de/projects/


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Luggage? GPS? Comic books? 
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email