[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: OzoneProxy doesn't implement OzoneRemote?
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Martin Harper wrote:
> Falko Braeutigam wrote:
>
> > Making OzoneProxy implement OzoneRemote would change the meaning of OzoneRemote.
> > But wouldon the other hand allow to write code like your example. Do you
> > think that avoiding the explicit cast is a good reason to change meaning of
> > OzoneRemote?
>
> Well, if I understand you, the meaning of Remote is twofold :-
> 1) mark interfaces for OPP
> 2) provide an interface that subclasses of both Compatible and Proxy inherit from.
>
> The first of the meanings would not change - OPP still works just fine with
> Compatible and Proxy implementing Remote.
>
> The second of the meanings just makes Remote more logical :-
> 2) provide an interface that both Compatible and Proxy inherit from.
>
> Since you shouldn't ever have base objects of these types in the database, it makes
> no practical difference in meaning. But it would now be possible to work with
> Compatibles and Proxies objects in terms of the base class, which has advantages
> when you want to deal with DB objects as generic objects, and use reflection, to
> discover their properties.
>
> Casts from Proxy/Compatible to Remote should always succeed anyway - why force the
> programmer to put them in, for the sake of a two word change? :-)
Well, what can I say... sounds reasonable ;)
Did you test it? If nobody finds a reason why we should not do this,
then I will make the change.
Falko
--
______________________________________________________________________
Falko Braeutigam mailto:falko@smb-tec.com
SMB GmbH http://www.smb-tec.com