Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Leszek Gawron wrote:
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
Leszek Gawron wrote:
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
I added/changed three things in Apples:
- Apples can be Spring beans. In order to lookup a bean, prepand
#, e.g. to lookup a bean of name 'myBean', use <map:call
function="#myBean"/>.
- Add an AppleNotFoundException which informs why an Apple can't
be initialized.
- Add sendStatus() to the AppleResponse interface.
Comments?
I think you implemented a duplicate. Some time ago I have commited
ServiceApplesProcessor which looks up apples using service manager.
The only thing you have to to is to use different "flow language"
I see, but I don't like to have another flow language because I want
to use both Apple initialization options in the same sitemap. WDYT?
What 'apple initialization options' are you refering to ?
- Thread.currentThread().getContextClassLoader().loadClass(appleName);
- sitemapManager.lookup(beanName);
And why would you like to mix those? Either you want managed apples or
you don't. If some do not need to be managed the only thing you need to
do is:
<bean id="appleName" class="o.a.c.apples.AppleName" scope="prototype"/>
and you have the same functionality but more consistent.
There is one more thing that I dislike about current apples + spring
integration: you can mix ApplesController vs. StatelessApplesController
(which triggers different continuations handling) and prototype scope
vs. singleton scope.
The most dangerous situation is marking a bean singleton and not
implementing StatelessAppleController. This way a continuation will be
created with a singleton apple which other threads also will use.
Simply put: ApplesProcessor.callFunction should not depend on marker
interfaces if used with managed apples.
--
Leszek Gawron http://www.mobilebox.pl/krs.html
CTO at MobileBox Ltd.
