# Re: Why the difference

Roland Schemers (Roland.Schemers@Eng)
Sat, 14 Feb 1998 21:14:24 -0800 (PST)

- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Richard M. Smith: "Re: Holes in the Java sandbox"
- Previous message: Li Gong: "Re: Holes in the Java sandbox"
- In reply to: Danny Mr: "Why the difference"

    From: Roland.Schemers@Eng (Roland Schemers)

    Message-Id: <199802150514.VAA10400@crypto.eng.sun.com>

    Subject: Re: Why the difference

    To: fp65@dial.pipex.com (Danny Mr)

    Date: Sat, 14 Feb 1998 21:14:24 -0800 (PST)

    In-Reply-To: <199802141300.FAA09598@java1.javasoft.com> from "Danny Mr" at Feb 14, 98 01:27:13 pm

> I noticed a difference between the way Cipher classes are implemented and
> messageDigest and signer.
>
> Basically why do the digest and signer classses inherit from their
> respective Spis rather than have a reference like Cipher. The latter
> would seem much cleaner.

Simple answer:

Backward compatibility with JDK 1.1.

The only way to separate the api/spi's in 1.1 and not break
compatibility was to make the API classes extend the SPI.
We had a chance to do it the right way in JCE.

thanks, roland

- Next message: Richard M. Smith: "Re: Holes in the Java sandbox"
- Previous message: Li Gong: "Re: Holes in the Java sandbox"
- In reply to: Danny Mr: "Why the difference"