brett at newinstance.com
Wed Oct 3 07:19:01 PDT 2001
> > Having a helper class does not mean removing the convenience methods:
> > helper class may provide the actual implementation and the existing
> > convenience methods will make use of the helper.
> I have to disagree here. That approach would imply the helper classes
> would be part of the core, and that means the core API would get the
> additional methods anyway -- same API size increase with the downside
> they wouldn't be in the place one would expect them or look for them, or
> in the place OOP would naturally place them.
Yup. Ditto on that from me; the idea of a helper class is to reduce the core
size. FWIW, I'm on the side of a helper class and less clutter in the core.
That said, what little time I do have for JDOM, I probably won't be the one
doing the work, so I can't be rock solid on my support (I don't like signing
other people up for work I want done ;-) ).
Brett McLaughlin <http://www.newInstance.com>
Lutris Technologies <http://www.lutris.com>
Author, Java and XML <http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/javaxml2>
More information about the jdom-interest