>>> o We have as many filters as we need in the chain >>> o Filters can be added or removed dynamically >> >> Hmm.. here I would like to add, that if the chain is modifiable > > Seems like you started a sentence, but were disturbed and never finished it ;)
Oh its covered below, was just punching in that for static chains, we need not copy them :) Well I thought I had a solution and later realized that its not going to be a walk in the Park :-) >>> o A chain is instanciated for each session (if we have 10K sessions, we have >>> 10K instances of chain) >> >> Agreed. But is there a possibility to have it only for mutable chains. >> Say if a Chain is static (User's choice), we may choose not to create >> so many instances. Although we need to see how much complexity it adds >> to our implementation. > > Yeah, exactly. I forgot to mention that. > > >> There is one more thing, related to stateful filters. How do we take >> care of them. > > Good question... > > The problem is how do we handle state selection. The previous > discussion exposed the transition mechanism, not the selection. > Obvioulsy, depending on the approach (1 2 or 3), the way we handle the > next filter selection will not be implemented the same way. To me, > approach 2 is the more versatile... Agreed. Let me scratch my head a bit more. -- thanks ashish
