I go with what I said. Extending from Object is sulfurous since all
type parameters extend at least from Object.
On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Elijah Zupancic <eli...@zupancic.name> wrote:
> Paul,
>
> You may be right. Which one is more idiomatic?
>
> Thanks,
> -Elijah
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Paul Benedict <pbened...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:47 PM, Elijah Zupancic <eli...@zupancic.name> wrote:
>>> Thanks for your comments Nail.
>>>
>>> I think that I've come around to see your point after sleeping on it.
>>> What do you think about this:
>>>
>>> Context.java - would be defined as so:
>>>
>>> public interface Context<K extends Object, V extends Object> extends Map<K,
>>> V>
>>
>> Isn't that identical to?
>> public interface Context<K, V> extends Map<K, V>
>>
>>> Then ContextBase.java would be defined like so:
>>>
>>> public class ContextBase extends ConcurrentHashMap<String, Object>
>>> implements Context<String, Object> {
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
