On 12/7/11 2:58 PM, Chad Beaulac wrote:
Why not use an enum for all the keys?
There is no such thing like a generic Enum type which would be inherited
by all Enums.
Something like session.addAttribute( Enum, Object ) is not possible.
Of course, if we define the addAttribute method as :
addAttribute(Object, Object)
that would be possible.
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny<elecha...@apache.org>wrote:
On 12/5/11 4:32 PM, Christian Schwarz wrote:
As a user, having to create a new instance to hold the key and value might
be seen as heavy, don't you think ?
session.set(new AttributeKey<String>(String.**
class,"myKey"),"myAttribute");
is a bit more complex than
session.set( "myKey", "myAttribute" );
Or is it just me ?
It's true for your example! I don't know, but i think the most
developers
would use a 'final static'- constant for there keys, to avoid misspelling
and to reduce the memory footprint. I my huble opinion the heavier
constuction process (+ ~5sec) could save time because i don't have to test
and/or debug, if set an attribute of the wrong type accidently. I think
we
need more opinions here, to see what the future users might think about
the
pro& contra.
Totally agree. And we can still change in a near future, before freezing
the code.
Note that your proposal is closer to MINA 2, so a migration would be
easier (another pro for your proposal).
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
