Hi, On Sat, 26 Jan 2002 17:14, Adam Murdoch wrote: > > I tend to think of services as different from types. Services > > persist over > > the length of the ant "execution" or at least the "workspace > > execution" or > > whatever term we were using for this. Types are created by tasks while > > serviuces never can be etc. > > Exactly. And that's why they would use different roles, to distinguish > between what they are and how they should be used. But that doesn't mean > the same infrastructure shouldn't be available to both services and > data-types.
I think we mean different things when we are talking about services vs types. When I think of services I tend to think that the services are a semi-singleton available throughout the execution of all tasks. Where types are created and used as needed. For instance - consider the Javac task. It would use the JavacExecManager service. Depending on parameters passed in the JavacExecManager would use a JavaCompilerAdaptor object (ie Jikes, Modern, GCJ whatever). So in this case the task does not directly interact with the GCJ/Jikes/etc types but instead acts through the service which would in turn use the types. Thoughts? -- Cheers, Pete *------------------------------------------------------* | Hlade's Law: If you have a difficult task, give it | | to a lazy person -- they will find an easier | | way to do it. | *------------------------------------------------------* -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
