Mike,
While we are discussing the whole delegate approach, I still think it
will be OK to apply your patch.
Before I do that a quick question - any specific reason for allowing
multiple delegates. I think a single one should be enough. I guess this
is a conceptual thing. Single delegate makes behavior more predictable
for the user than it would be with chained delegates (things like
notification order, etc.). Also multiple delegates do not add much
value to the framework - if a user needs to, implementing "chaining"
inside the custom delegate is trivial.
Andrus
On Thursday, September 25, 2003, at 03:04 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> Mike Kienenberger <mkienen..laska.net> wrote:
> > Here are the patches.
> >
> > Unfortunately, they are against the 2003-09-11 build. I did a diff
> between 09/11 and 09/25 and didn't see any conflicts, but some of the
> imports, class instance variables, and methods providing nearby
> "context" for the patch may have changed.
>
> Ok. I decided to be slightly less lazy and apply the patch to
> 2003-09-25. While only one of six hunks failed, and while it could be
> easily eyeballed and installed, I also noticed that my editor was
> using tabs rather than 4 spaces for indentation.
>
> Here's a revised DataContext.java patch against 2003-09-25. Please
> use DataContextDelegate.java from the previous message as I am not
> resending it.
>
>
> <DataContext.java.diffs>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Tue Sep 30 2003 - 14:20:04 EDT