Ulrich Mayring wrote:
Berin Loritsch wrote:
Strictly speaking, a stateless component is one that
does not maintain information between method calls (AKA state).
[...]
I.e. there is information that is kept between component uses.
Hello Berin,
this is a different definition than the one from Robert. He said the
component doesn't maintain caller state. You seem to say now that the
component also doesn't maintain its own, internal state. To me that
looks like a big difference.
That is exactly what I meant, that the component doesn't maintain state
between client calls. Sorry if I confused you :-)
I tend to agree with your stricter definition, which also IMHO
automatically makes it thread-safe.
Not necessarily true. As I mentioned before, if the stateless component
maintains a reference to a non thread safe component, say a SAX handler
or a JDBC connection, then the component may not be thread safe because
the reference isn't. Some apps got into trouble with this when it came
to servlets; they used class variables for non thread-safe objects.
> A component cannot be accessed until it is completely instantiated.
> As soon as you have the component in your hot little hands, it has
> already been initialized and put through the lifecycle.
What about dynamic undeploy/deploy?
> However, if the component does not need to store information, and
> does not force the client to call methods in a specific order, then
> all is well.
During initialize() the component stores information and it does
matter in which order you call the lifecycle methods :)
Ulrich
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
