Berin Loritsch a écrit :
>
> Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >
> > Berin Loritsch a écrit :
> > >
> > > Peter Donald wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I know this was KBed last time but ... In the proposal is the interfaces for
> > > >
> > > > interface Parametizabe
> > > > {
> > > > void parametize( Parameters parameters ) throws ParametersException;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > I propose that this be included in CVS for components that Configura* is
> > > > overkill. Specifically I found that this pattern is widely used to launch
> > > > the Runtime/Kernel/Engine/whatever in a number of projects. Tomcat uses
> > > > system properties, Phoenix uses Parameters, OpenEJB uses properties, and a
> > > > few other servers I looked at have a similar arrangement.
> > > >
> > > > I am not proposing that these be part of Blocks lifecycle just that they be
> > > > in CVS so that other components (like Embeddors) can make use of it rather
> > > > than using some custom method. Thoughts/Votes???
> > >
> > > The Parameters class, to me, is very much the same as the Java Properties
> > > class. 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.
> > >
> > > 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 );
> > > }
> > >
> >
> > java.util.Properties extends HashMap and as such has all its methods
> > synchronized. Couldn't it have a bad impact on performances in cases
> > where synchronization is not needed ?
>
> Hashtable is synchronized, and I thought it was based on that.
> But yes, it could. How often do we refer to the original configuration
> object without caching the information in our class?
>
Sorry, I made a bad typo, I meant "Hashtable" of course (the good old
one that's been there since JDK 1.0)... HashMap (from the JDK 1.2
collections) is not synchronized.
I'm so used to type "HashMap" in my code that my fingers don't want to
type "table" after "Hash" ;-)
Sorry again for this...
--
Sylvain Wallez
Anyware Technologies - http://www.anyware-tech.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
