The follow up question is located Here .
This is a Observablean Observable class similar to java.util.Observablejava.util.Observable. The difference is, that it uses generics to avoid casts. The question is: Is it really worth the effort? What are the problems with this code?
Observable now carries type of args sent to each Observer, and Observer is also aware of it, thus no cast needed.
The follow up question is located here.
The follow up question is located Here .
This is a Observable class similar to java.util.Observable. difference is, it uses generics to avoid casts. The question is: Is it really worth the effort? What are the problems with this code?
Observable now carries type of args sent to each Observer, and Observer is also aware of it, thus no cast needed.
This is an Observable class similar to java.util.Observable. The difference is that it uses generics to avoid casts. The question is: Is it really worth the effort? What are the problems with this code?
Observable now carries type of args sent to each Observer, and Observer is also aware of it, thus no cast needed.
The follow up question is located here.
The follow up question is located Here .
This is a Observable class similar to java.util.Observable. difference is, it uses generics to avoid casts. The question is: Is it really worth the effort? What are the problems with this code?
This is a Observable class similar to java.util.Observable. difference is, it uses generics to avoid casts. The question is: Is it really worth the effort? What are the problems with this code?
The follow up question is located Here .
This is a Observable class similar to java.util.Observable. difference is, it uses generics to avoid casts. The question is: Is it really worth the effort? What are the problems with this code?