14 Nov
2013
14 Nov
'13
10:09 p.m.
I think it should be kept open
- first, it is trivial to change how VerveineJ name the anonymous classes
- second, it would be good that verveineJ and Moose agree on this point.
unless we decide to change the default name in Moose (in that case I
would be for changing it accordingly in verveineJ)
nicoals
On 11/14/2013 09:25 PM, moose-technology(a)googlecode.com wrote:
Comment #5 on issue 999 by tu...(a)tudorgirba.com: VerveineJ: management
of the anonymous class
http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=999
The thing inside the brackets is the type of the parameter, I think.
In any case, do we agree to close the issue and tackle the Enum one
separately?
--
Nicolas Anquetil -- RMod research team (Inria)