Torsten Curdt <tcurdt <at> apache.org> writes: > >> 1. Keep the ProblemHandler across compilations (and add a > >> lifecycle) or re-create the object > > > > Hmm, this also depends :) For the error counter there is no problem > > to create one on every compilation cycle. > > You mean create counter object??
Yes. > > But for the external ones passed as parameter > > you might want to use always the same. > > Which is why you need to reset it ....which means a lifecycle. Yes, I didn't speak against lifecycle. Only against *one* lifecycle in the interface. And handling different lifecycles in the interface gets difficult or confusing IMO. > Somehow I got the feeling we are a bit running round in circles here. So let's break the circles. From what I see we see the same requirements but only draw different conclusions. > >> 2. Is there really a usecase where you don't need the compilation > >> result in a ProblemHandler? > > > > I don't know if I understand the question correctly, but a > > ProblemHandler not handling problems makes no sense. > > It does handle the problem ...but a name like ProblemConsumer would probably > make more sense. Yes, ok, but this has no implication on the deliberation. > YOU ALWAYS NEED THE COMPILATION RESULT > > ...and that's my point. Yes, otherwise you would not need a handler/consumer. Sorry for exasperating you :) Joerg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
