Peter Donald wrote: > > > > > Hmmm, I'm not sure if this is a good feature - because an optional > > dependency means it's - well - optional. And I see two use cases > > their: > > a) The optional component is only used if it is available > > thats the usecase I had in mind. > > > b) The optional component is used only in some circumstances > > That is the usecase that I originally liked but Berin jumped on > me back in ye > old days for it. Then we both jumped on Fede (one of the original avalon > developers). > > Whats everyone else think. Should optional dependencies be "optional" > depending on the presence of some attribute (be it config variable or > something). > > Or should it be the assemblers decision, ie If they provide the > component then > it is used else it is not. > I think the XSLTProcessor is a good example for a use-case of b).
A store is available in (nearly) every system, so this component is always present. If we only have use-case a), then the XSLTProcessor always uses the store for caching stylesheets. That would be a realy problem if you have many, changing stylesheets. The caching would reduce performance. So, I think b) is needed - unless we want to XSLTProcessors ( a caching and a non-caching one)... Carsten -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
