On Oct 20, 2010, at 2:25 PM, Oliver Heger wrote:
> Am 20.10.2010 17:37, schrieb Stephen Colebourne:
>> Essentially, a more valid version is in [configuration] IIRC, but this
>> one remained because people didn't want to load another jar just for
>> this "simple functaionlity". All IIRC.
>
> The
Am 20.10.2010 17:37, schrieb Stephen Colebourne:
Essentially, a more valid version is in [configuration] IIRC, but this
one remained because people didn't want to load another jar just for
this "simple functaionlity". All IIRC.
The Javadocs of ExtendedProperties recommend using the
PropertiesC
Essentially, a more valid version is in [configuration] IIRC, but this
one remained because people didn't want to load another jar just for
this "simple functaionlity". All IIRC.
Stephen
On 20 October 2010 16:32, Matt Benson wrote:
>
> On Oct 19, 2010, at 9:29 PM, sebb wrote:
>
>> IMO, the Exte
On Oct 19, 2010, at 9:29 PM, sebb wrote:
> IMO, the ExtendedProperties class has rather odd behaviour.
>
> It is documented as an extension of normal Java properties, yet it
> allows Objects to be used as values:
>
> addProperty(String, Object)
> setProperty(String, Object)
>
> The save() meth
IMO, the ExtendedProperties class has rather odd behaviour.
It is documented as an extension of normal Java properties, yet it
allows Objects to be used as values:
addProperty(String, Object)
setProperty(String, Object)
The save() method ignores anything but String and List, so it
won't save suc
