I wrote this a while back, but never sent it. ---------------------------- old message------------------------------------ On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 6:19 PM, Bob Tarling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I really don't like the way we've used PropertyChangedEvent, I think > that was not the best decision for listening to changes from the model > subsystem. It makes a class that's listening poorly self-documenting > as it's not actually clear what it is interested in listening to. It > can also result in bloated methods dealing with too events from > different subsystems. Not my idea! > I'm don't know what advantage there is of having our own base events > and listeners or a central registry. Just extending EventListener and > EventObject I would have thought would be fine. But then we have a > third way. Anyone want to defend the central registry or should we document it as being discouraged for new event types? -----------------------end old message-------------------------------------------- Following up on the recent discussion, it sounds like Brian doesn't see any advantages either. > What really surprised me when adding in this functionality was that I had to > modify ArgoEventPump to handle the firing of my specific events. This is the coupling that I think is inappropriate. There's no reason to have all this disparate stuff lumped together in a central registry. Unless someone comes up with a good reason it should stay, we should deprecate this mechanism. The question is whether it's too late to split out all the recent additions to the event pump and put them some more reasonable place in the public API before the release. Tom --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
