At 08:38 17/4/01 -0400, Berin Loritsch wrote:
>The Parameters class, to me, is very much the same as the Java Properties
>class.
agreed.
> In fact, the biggest difference is that it can be automatically
>created from a Configuration object. The Parameters class is a carry over
>from Cocoon's old framework.
The biggest difference for me is the getParameterAs<Blah> convenience methods.
>So the question is, should we standardize on Properties and have a custom
>object that populates a Properties object from a Configuration file for us?
>
>Or should we keep the Parameters class, and use the Parameterizable
interface?
>
>If we do the Parameterizable approach, then the interface is good.
>If we do the Properties approach, then we should have an interface like this:
>
>interface Propertizable {
> void propertize( Properties properties );
>}
I am good with either - I like Parameters because of convenience methods
but truth be told most of my parameters are strings ...
Cheers,
Pete
*-----------------------------------------------------*
| "Faced with the choice between changing one's mind, |
| and proving that there is no need to do so - almost |
| everyone gets busy on the proof." |
| - John Kenneth Galbraith |
*-----------------------------------------------------*
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
