Difficult to have a "standard" there since there isn't even a standard
Container interface...

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Yannick Menager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 2:08 PM
Subject: Re: Startable doesn't has a isRunning() interface ?


> The container would generally not call isRunning().... But for example
> if I have an admin console, i would like it to be able to be informed of
> the state of each component. And I would like it to be a *standard* way
> for any Startable Component... be it using a isRunning() type of
> function, or using an event-based system, as long as it's standard :)
>
> Jonathan Hawkes wrote:
> > In the current specification, it is fairly straightforward to implement
an
> > Avalon container.  When would you suggest the container poll this new
> > isRunning method?  It would be preferable to have the component notify
the
> > container if it shut itself down.  However, then you run the risk of
> > perverting IOC.
> >
> > The Startable interface is simply a lifecycle interface that stipulates
a
> > contract with the container.  The container does not really care what
the
> > start() and stop() methods actually do -- or even what they start or
stop.
> > The contract is simple, and I am opposed to complicating it.
> >
> > Components are given the resources to manage themselves (that is the
point).
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Yannick Menager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 1:22 PM
> > Subject: Re: Startable doesn't has a isRunning() interface ?
> >
> >
> >
> >>But that way you're putting a risk that the container might be out of
> >>sync with the real state of the component. All that to save having an
> >>extra function. I would think the downsides are bigger than the cost of
> >>having an extra function to check the state of the component. Otherwise
> >>most people will implement that function but it won't be standard,
> >>reducing potential reusability, and causing pains to people who want to
> >>incorporate dynamic administration capabilities in the container.
> >>
> >>Jonathan Hawkes wrote:
> >>
> >>>Yes.  An isRunning() method would not be useful to the container.  The
> >>>container knows whether the startable isRunning or not (ie: it has
> >
> > called
> >
> >>>start() and not stop() ).
> >>>
> >>>----- Original Message ----- 
> >>>From: "Yannick Menager" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>>Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 10:17 AM
> >>>Subject: Startable doesn't has a isRunning() interface ?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Is there any reason Startable doesn't has a isRunning() ( or something
> >>>>like that ) interface ?
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>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]
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]

Reply via email to