On Mon, 12 Nov 2001 22:27, Ulrich Mayring wrote:
> > > I know that *.xinfo is
> > > for the block and assembly.xml for the .sar application. But it seems
> > > to me that in every .sar application I write, there is kind of an
> > > aggregate of the various *.xinfo files in my assembly.xml. It would be
> > > nicer, if this aggregation of information would be done automatically
> > > or not at all.
> >
> > again - need more context to figure out which part you are referring to.
>
> The *.xinfo file specifies which service this block offers and which
> services it depends on.

right.

> The assembly.xml file specifies which blocks are included in the .sar
> application. For each block it is specified which class this block
> offers

I am not sure what you mean here. There should be no where in assembly.xml 
where a Block declares the services it offers. Is that what you mean ?

> and which classes it depends on.

Not which classes it depends upon but which instances of classes that it 
depends upon. FWIW it is the same way the EJB/Servlet/J2EE specs define usage 
of JNDI contexts.

> Now, we have a difference here in that the services specify an interface
> and the classes an implementation. There could be several
> implementations of an interface - but there can be only one interface
> for an implementation. 

again not necessarily so. A Block could offer Foo, ExtendedFoo and FooMBean 
services easily enough.

> So once you specified an implementation it is
> IMHO redundant to specify its interface, no?

See above but there should not be any blocks who specify there interfaces in 
the assembly file. The assembly declares the type of dependency that a block 
will satisfy. As it is possibly for a block to depend on multiple instances 
of a service, I can't see anyway around this.
same service

-- 
Cheers,

Pete

----------------------------------
   "Don't play dumb with me. 
I happen to be an expert at that" 
           - Maxwell Smart
----------------------------------

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to