Re: Proposed PRF changes to address Ken's comments

[Jeffrey Altman <jaltman at columbia.edu>]

Larry:

In Java, "classes" support inheritance, "interfaces" do not.
As I pointed out in my e-mail from last night.   There is nothing that
prevents a class that implements the GSSContext interface from also
implementing this new method.  However, before the method can be used
the reference of type GSSContext must be replaced with a reference
type that includes the new method.

Jeffrey Altman


Liqiang(Larry) Zhu wrote:

> I want to speak a bit for C#, the C# interface supports inheritance (I
> think Java interface does too), thus you can expose this new PRF in a
> subtype of the v1 interface. 
> 
> That said I am not quite convinced abstract class is superior, as some
> might have claimed, than the interface. The advantage of abstract class
> is that you can supply a default implementation. I am not sure it is
> possible to supply a default PRF implementation.
> 
> -- Larry
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: kitten-bounces at lists.ietf.org
> [mailto:kitten-bounces at lists.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Altman
> Sent: Monday, June 27, 2005 12:24 PM
> To: Nicolas Williams
> Cc: kitten at ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Proposed PRF changes to address Ken's comments
> 
> Nicolas Williams wrote:
> 
> 
>>I propose removing the Java bindings from the PRF I-D and resolving
> 
> this
> 
>>problem separately.  No, I don't like this proposal, but it's either
>>that or wait to resolve the Java bindings extensibility issue first.
>>
>>Nico
> 
> 
> Can someone speak to the question of whether or not C# is going to have
> similar issues?
> 
> Jeffrey Altman

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
Kitten mailing list
Kitten at lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten