>
> One idea I've been tossing around lately is a new approach with a
> separation of data and function. Not sure what it would look like or
> how it would work, but it seems interesting to me. It would allow you
> to define a data class such as Human, but have that Human behave like
> a Infant at one point in time and a Teenager later. In the reverse,
> the Infant might need Human data, but also other data classes to
> function properly. Then later on the Teenager might also need the
> Human data, but other data to function.
>
> Need to think about it for another year or so to figure it all out. ;)
>
> FWIW this is exactly the motivation behind Qi4j - context based  
> behaviour...
>
>    http://www.qi4j.org/introduction.html
>
> there's a mailing list (see http://www.qi4j.org/26.html for  
> subscription/archives)
> where the design is regularly discussed and refined, and if you're  
> familiar with
> DDD concepts then you should feel right at home

Took a look and it is definitely an interesting pattern. I did some  
work back in 2001-2002 with something similar to this built on top of  
Dynamo's container. It was more of a code generation approach, but  
similar. I like mixins a lot as a pattern in Java.

I still think there is some advantage to moving some of this into the  
language. I haven't figured out how to do it yet, but I think it could  
work well.

-bp


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"google-guice" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-guice?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to