My comments in-line: On Monday 28 April 2003 16:35, Costin Manolache wrote: > To keep things simple and make it easier to get an agreement - > let's let adapters out, and focus on the core issue. > > IMO it seems what everything leads to is the need to extend > the introspection patterns with another case. Let's agree > on this pattern first. > > Assuming: > > <parent> > <myChild> > </parent> > > If ParentClass has no addMyChild()/createMyChild() method, we'll need > to look up in some table and find a class associated with <myChild>. > ( it can be the "roles" table, or just the typedef table, or some other > table that uses the context info or adapters ). > > Then we'll find some interfaces associated with MyChildClass - either all > interfaces, all interfaces and base classes, or only an explicit set > declared in some other data strucutures. Each of the interface will be > a potential role. > > We'll then look in ParentClass for an add method with that particular > interface as parameter. > > > The points of disagreement: > > - should we add a separate table for <child>->class association - or just > use the typedef ?
We should use the contents of typedef > > - Should we use (<parent>, <child>) tuple to find the class? Should we use > (ParentClass, <parent>, <child>) tuple ? Or just <child> name - i.e. > context-free ? The name should be context-free. > > - try all interfaces - or have some data structures to restrict to only a > subset ? Use java rules, (try all interfaces) > > - addComponent( MyRole ) or addMyRole( MyRole ) or both ? > I.e. a fixed-name method, with overloading to support multiple roles, > or one add method per role ? add(ElementClass) to be consistent with other ant method matching patterns. > In the second case, we'll need some additional metadata to associate > the role interface with the suffix of the add method. > ( MyRole -> org.apache.tools.ant.MyRoleInterface ) > > - should setComponent be used to indicate single-child ? ( of course, all > primitives that can be used as attributes will remain attributes ) No, setComponent() should just of an attribute 'component="value"' as per current ant method pattern matching/ Peter
