xml-dev - RE: Re: [xml-dev] What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: [xml-dev] Articl

RE: Re: [xml-dev] What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: [xml-dev] Articl

[ Lists Home | Date Index | Thread Index ]

To: "'Prakash Yamuna'" <techpy@yahoo.com>,"'Dare Obasanjo'" <dareo@microsoft.com>,<xml-dev@lists.xml.org>
Subject: RE: Re: [xml-dev] What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: [xml-dev] Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
From: "Michael Kay" <mike@saxonica.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 00:08:33 -0000
In-reply-to: <20050218235529.34332.qmail@web54607.mail.yahoo.com>
Thread-index: AcUWFYrg5SmeSEEYRbeLpK3mDgAOoQAAVuuw

> But I always end up with a feeling that there must be
> better way for things to evolve. The current approach
> of "CAN'T TOUCH INTERFACES" - is I feel flawed - how
> do you evolve in such an environment?

I find it surprising that one can't add a method to an interface with a
default implementation, making it more like an abstract class but still
allowing multiple inheritance.

Michael Kay
http://www.saxonica.com/

Follow-Ups:
- RE: Re: [xml-dev] What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: [xml-dev] Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
  - From: Prakash Yamuna <techpy@yahoo.com>

References:
- RE: Re: [xml-dev] What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: [xml-dev] Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
  - From: Prakash Yamuna <techpy@yahoo.com>

Prev by Date: RE: Re: [xml-dev] What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: [xml-dev] Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
Next by Date: Re: [xml-dev] What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: [xml-dev] Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
Previous by thread: RE: Re: [xml-dev] What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: [xml-dev] Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
Next by thread: RE: Re: [xml-dev] What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: [xml-dev] Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread