I have some comments, that might On Thu, 29 Jan 2004, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Thursday 29 January 2004 05:49, Leo Sutic wrote: > > I propose to: > > > > 1. add the following MutableConfiguration interface to framework > > (see below). > > > > 2. Add the getMutableChild and getMutableChildren methods to > > the DefaultConfiguration class. > > > > 3. Have DefaultConfiguration implement the MutableConfiguration > > interface. > > > > +1 from me. > > I vote "No". > > There has been a lot of talk of what to do and how to do it, but very little > about WHY. > > IMHO, it is even a violation of IoC. My personal interpretation of IoC is > "Here you go Mr Component, I have provided this for you, now live with it!" > > > Why should the component be allowed to change its configuration object? If so, > why should the component not be allowed to change its Logger, Dependencies > and Contexts as well? > > Is it implied that the Container MUST, SHOULD or CAN persist that between JVM > invocations? > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
