> It's a convenient short-cut. If you are philosophically opposed to such > things you can go the more formal route and make things harder on yourself. > :) >
hehe, that seems to be the story of my life :-) ... the reluctance to do things the easy way. By the way, thanks Dianne for the replies! I am using AIDL-defined interfaces right now. I guess I went a little bit too far maybe. Currently I have one service to which I bind from two different activities with plus 1 callback-interface each. Now I'm starting to rethink this architecture because I'm adding more and more activities which need to talk to the service running in the background. Having a separate binding for each activity is starting to seem a bit too much.. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Android Developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/android-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
