Did a little thinking outside the box recently w.r.t. BuilderFactory. Dieter wanted to "subclass" BuilderFactory to add new parameter elements ... elements that made it easier to set service properties.
He wanted to do this because BuilderFactory has a fixed number of elements, corresponding to a fix set of acceptible types: string, long, service, configuration, etc. But what if the shoe was on the other foot? What if BuilderFactory had a set-object element that could, magically, take any type of object, and didn't care where it came from? Maybe its an object, or a configuration, or a service ... or even a property obtained from a service? The system I'm working on will allow that. A prefix on the contribution will allow its type to be interpreted, i.e.: service:foo.bar.Baz instance:org.foo.bar.Boo configuration:foo.bar.Blip bean:foo.bar.Baz:fred service-property:foo.bar.Baz:glip Those are examples off the top of my head. Of course, there'll be a configuration to define prefixes, and services to implement each type of prefix. If the one you need isn't available, then you'll be able to supply your own. Basically, it's a meta-level above translators. This will remove a lot of redundancy in some contributions: for example, the Pipeline schema is doubled: to allow service contributions, or contributions from bean factories. -- Howard M. Lewis Ship Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant Creator, Jakarta Tapestry Creator, Jakarta HiveMind http://howardlewisship.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
