[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Bill dehOra <Wdehora@cromwellmedia.co.uk>
- To: "'Elliotte Rusty Harold'" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>, David Megginson <david@megginson.com>, xml-dev <xml-dev@xml.org>
- Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 18:08:19 -0000
:I'm not sure I understand the objections to this style. Certainly
:it's prevalent. I used the single class import in my first book, but
:went back to import java.net.* after that to save space and time.
That's different. A compressed style is good for a book.
:Even accepting that "import java.net.*" is bad form, doesn't absolve
:us of the responsibility to avoid the problem in the first place.
The problem *is* avoided by not using wildcard imports. Java.net has thirty
something names, what's the justification for importing them all?
Suggestion. Retain the name and document the potential conflict in the
interface.
-Bill
***************************************************************************
This is xml-dev, the mailing list for XML developers.
To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@xml.org&BODY=unsubscribe%20xml-dev
List archives are available at http://xml.org/archives/xml-dev/threads.html
***************************************************************************
|
