Thanks for your comments, Magesh and Dominique. On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Dominique Devienne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Magesh Umasankar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> public boolean isDirtyWhenComparedWith(Object src); >> or if the "WhenComparedWith" seems to be pedantic, >> public boolean isDirty(Object src); >> >> Other implementations of TargetObject may choose >> different mechanisms to perform the comparison before >> saying that the target object is dirty or not. > > I like this abstraction. But would it work with a mapper that > returned several files to check dirty status given the proposed > single object signtature? As it is right now, TargetObject would be what the mapper has mapped to, so it would work (you have a single source file and multiple TargetObjects). >> As far as naming goes, the Object part in TargetObject seems >> pedantic to me. What do you expect, it's me 8-) > I don't like that name personally. TargetObject seems designed > exclusively for SourceFileScanner, and thus should relate to it by > name. Something like SourceFileItem? Which could be applied at both sides (taking the abstraction to the source side as well), yes. But if I wanted to move it to the source side as well, I'll soon get into trouble with isDirty as FileItem would need to know how to compare itself to a ZipItem or something. Stefan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
