Tom Klaasen wrote:
> ------------------------
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ------------------------
>
>
>>
>>It's not that bad--not that pretty either. However it allows us to
>>handle the Recyclable issues well. Otherwise I have to use reflection
>>to determine if it implements
>>"org.apache.avalon.excalibur.pool.Recyclable".
>
>
>
> You'd use instanceof, not reflection.
Not if the interface is not in the classpath while the pool is being
compiled! Pool and MPool *must* not rely on each other.
>>What happens if I have
>>something similar in another framework?
>
>
>
> Another quick&dirty hack?
I hate hacks. I had to rewrite an entire library because it was the
product of a ton of Q&D hacks. A generic solution that works in most
cases is the best way to go.
>>>Just my opinion. We've got such a nice framework right now, with lots of good
>design patterns incorporated, and I would hate to see it wasted in this way.
>>
>>How is an isolated incident of properly applied reflection a waste?
>
>
>
> Reflection always seems "appropriate", but in most cases the guy who codes it just
>thinks it's cool. I have fallen into this trap myself, and I have seen others falling
>into it also.
>
> If, however, you still think this is the way to go, who am I to stop you. Just
>consider me the sign saying "steep ravine ahead". If you're skilled enough to descend
>that ravine, by all means go ahead and do it. And a sign doesn't have any knowledge
>of the reasons why you want to descend that ravine, and nor do I.
>
> But I'll repeat my sig ;-)
Could you put some line breaks in your messages?
I only use reflection when there is no better alternative.
--
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
