> It sounds nice initially but I am a little reluctant
> to do it at the moment
> as I don't think we are willing enough atm to
> guarentee a serialized
> format.
Question: Would it be reasonable to make that a
requirement? It would make distributed configuration
of a group of servers easier.
> Another way of combatting it would be "serializing"
> it to XML and then
> using A ConfigurationBuilder on server to rebuild
> configuration object. Not
> sure - what do you think ?
That would be a good alternative. It is a heavier
solution, because we would be parsing and reparsing
an already created object.
My view of a Configuration object at this point is
that it should be simple to create and simple to use.
Returning arbitrary objects (which would only make
Configuration serializable if all the stored objects
were serializable) should be out of the picture. The
more I think about it, the less I like it.
Parameters should be equally simple to use and also
able to be Serialized.
Thoughts anyone?
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
