Hi,
Thank Wolf of your kind words, it really get me thinking this problem more
deeply.
What do you say about this:
Perhaps we can find a way to express attributes attributes too.
Like this:
....
<formattedtextfield id="pnlDetailBasic_pidDate">
<attr name="FormatterFactory">
<attr name="class">Date</attr>
<attr name="par1">dd.MM.yy</attr>
<attr name="par2">dd.MM.yy</attr>
<attr name="par3">ddMMyy</attr>
</attr>
<attr name="columns">10</attr>
<attr name="enabled">false</attr>
</formattedtextfield>
....
When we find the class attribute then we try to call its getInstance() or call
constructor with the given parameters.
This maid form a general structure to express parameter list for factory
objects.
Now we have the problem that if for example in previous example somebody like to
use comma as format character we have no way to separate the list separator from
format character. True, isn't it?
Here I just introduce an idea, the solution may of course be different.
About the efficiency reduction: I think that for now, we can start form the
assumption that if somebody wants to use custom attributes, then he has to pay
the efficiency penalty :-)
What you think about that?
//Jarmo
