tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3884961837046000063.post4411075906693920526..comments2009-08-07T10:43:15.581-07:00Joe Seymourhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12576454039878301947noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3884961837046000063.post-61774333599574755282009-08-07T10:43:15.581-07:002009-08-07T10:43:15.581-07:00Thanks Art! Glad I could help. I really enjoy the power of generics. I personally use generics very frequently because of their ability to use typed objects.Joe Seymourhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12576454039878301947noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3884961837046000063.post-50389119284349486312009-08-07T10:37:50.445-07:002009-08-07T10:37:50.445-07:00This was really interesting to me because lately I've been pondering when to make a class generic instead of having an interface-typed object composed/injected in. Clearly one of the factors in the decision to "go generic" is if the class ever needs to return the interface-typed object back OUT again; if so, then the client code might need to handle the return as a concrete type, not through the interface.Art Vandalayhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08432367996173233599noreply@blogger.com