I looked at both in SVN and see convergence and not too much difference. Can you guys agree to removing one? Which one? I know the classes are not identical, but they are similar enough to go "hmmm".
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:17 PM, Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jul 22, 2010, at 1:11 PM, Paul Benedict wrote: > > > Does EventListenerSupport provide anything useful besides a no-op > > implementation? > > > > EventListenerSupport does. AbstractEventSupport IMO provides little over > ELS: an Object event source, which in my experience is not necessarily the > greatest paradigm to emulate anyway. > > -Matt > > > On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 12:49 PM, James Carman > > <ja...@carmanconsulting.com>wrote: > > > >> On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:43 PM, Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >>> > >>> My point was that one could just as easily add these methods to a > >> subclass of EventListenerSupport. :) > >>> > >> > >> +1, agree with Matt here. Why not just extend EventListenerSupport > >> and add your custom fire* methods there? But, if you don't want to > >> add custom fire methods (and you really don't need to with the proxied > >> fire() method), then you can just use the EventListenerSupport class > >> directly. > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >> > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > >
