> From: Berin Loritsch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Design Decision:
>
> THE Component Manager IS A LOOKUP MECHANISM. PERIOD.
>
> The ECM is a HACK. It has poluted the minds of all who use
> it into thinking that there is no difference, or very little
> difference between a lookup mechanism and a container! The
> ECM merged the two in a monolithic design, and it is a HACK.
Berin,
please clarify yourself - I note that Fortress share the same
design where the AbstractContainer manages resources *and*
provides a ComponentManager interface via an internal class.
Do you object to ECM implementing the CM interface directly
instead of doing like Fortress, or?
Given your comments about the pool - that release() was just
a design decision based on the pool implementation - and that
we've sort of agreed that if the container does any kind
of pooling, then the ComponentManager interface must
have a release() method or some other way of letting the
client indicate that it is done using the object, is
it not then your opinion that pooling of components should
not be done by the container? (ComponentManager only used
for lookup -> no release() method -> no pooling)
/LS
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
