• To: "'Prakash Yamuna'" <techpy@y...>,"'Dare Obasanjo'" <dareo@m...>,<xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: Re: What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
• From: "Michael Kay" <mike@s...>
• Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 00:08:33 -0000
• In-reply-to: <20050218235529.34332.qmail@w...>
• 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: What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
    • From: Prakash Yamuna <techpy@y...>

• References:
  • RE: Re: What should TrAX look like? (Was: Re: Article on JAXP 1.3 "Fast and Easy XML Processing")
    • From: Prakash Yamuna <techpy@y...>

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