> Since there is a full range of setX() methods, and given the
> general usefulness of having a default constructor e.g. for
> JavaBeans / ActiveX,
> should this omission be rectified?
Yes. Thanks for pointing this out.
All the best,
David
-- David Megginson ak117@freenet.carleton.ca Microstar Software Ltd. dmeggins@microstar.com http://home.sprynet.com/sprynet/dmeggins/