james-mime4j-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Norman Maurer <nor...@apache.org>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1061294
Date Thu, 20 Jan 2011 14:22:46 GMT
2011/1/20 Oleg Kalnichevski <olegk@apache.org>:
> On Thu, 2011-01-20 at 14:36 +0100, Norman Maurer wrote:
>> Hi Olek,
>>
>> may I ask you whats the goal of this ? Is it just a prefered style of
>> doing stuff or more to make it easier to extend it ?
>>
>> Thx,
>> Norman
>>
>
> The current mime4j API in trunk is inconsistent about the way various
> classes expose formatting and parsing methods. For instance,
> AddressBuilder / AddressFormatter / MimeBuilder methods are all static,
> whereas MessageWriter methods are non static, but the class provides a
> static DEFAULT instance for convenience. I do not have a strong
> preference for either of two styles as long as things are consistent
> across the entire library. I thought UtilityClass#DEFAULT style had a
> slight advantage of giving the users an option of overriding
> implementations of individual methods, so changed similar utility
> classes to use the same style mainly for the sake of consistency.
>
> I can happily revert to all static methods as before as long as it is ok
> to change MessageWriter as well.
>
> Oleg
>

I'm ok with your changes just wanted to know why you do it ;) So
nothing wrong with it...

Go ahead,
Norman

Mime
View raw message