| [EMF Compare] ModelComparator internal? [message #120537] |
Tue, 29 April 2008 10:23  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
Is there any specific reason ModelComparator is internal? Could we make it
an API class?
I saw it refers to TeamHandlerDescriptor and AbstractTeamHandler which are
strangely internal as well, although their description suggest they should
be public?
Thanks,
David
|
|
|
| Re: [EMF Compare] ModelComparator internal? [message #120590 is a reply to message #120537] |
Tue, 29 April 2008 11:00  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070109070300040001020707
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
David,
I simply didn't add the whole "This class is not intended to be
subclassed by clients" thing in the javadoc since I believe *.internal.*
package is enough for that matter ;).
The reason these classes are internal is that we wish to keep this part
of the comparison "breakable" and then don't provide it as API. To be a
little more specific, these "TeamHandlers" are things I would have
rather avoided and though we still need to see if it can be opened (you
might have seen that the schema of the extension point using these
classes is not provided either, I coded this before a way of setting it
"internal" appeared), we thought this part of the code was too
error-prone to be opened (as yet?).
Regards
Laurent Goubet
Obeo
David Michonneau a
|
|
|
| Re: [EMF Compare] ModelComparator internal? [message #617950 is a reply to message #120537] |
Tue, 29 April 2008 11:00 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------070109070300040001020707
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
David,
I simply didn't add the whole "This class is not intended to be
subclassed by clients" thing in the javadoc since I believe *.internal.*
package is enough for that matter ;).
The reason these classes are internal is that we wish to keep this part
of the comparison "breakable" and then don't provide it as API. To be a
little more specific, these "TeamHandlers" are things I would have
rather avoided and though we still need to see if it can be opened (you
might have seen that the schema of the extension point using these
classes is not provided either, I coded this before a way of setting it
"internal" appeared), we thought this part of the code was too
error-prone to be opened (as yet?).
Regards
Laurent Goubet
Obeo
David Michonneau a
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.07821 seconds
Home