On Sun, 28 Apr 2002, Hiram Chirino wrote: > Using a set of properties to identify an object just seems werid to me.
yes. it's not just wierd, its clearly a poor design choice in this case. the object name is used as an identifier and therefore needed for lookup. overloading the identifier to become something other than just an array of chars we can compare is a problem. > WHY did the JMX spec do this??? Why not just use a unique string to > identify an object??? I do not know. > Yes, I see one reasone, so you can do querys and lookup objects > based on properties, buy you could still do that without making the > properties part of the identifier. > > Do you know what I mean?? totally. see my other post. yes the object name should be just an identifier -- none of this property/pattern business. just a key for lookups. should probably spend some time trying to figure out how to bypass the object name use completely (leave it as internal to the server only) and see if we can replace it with a real identifier. I don't know if it would work or possible... need to think about it -- Juha _______________________________________________ Jboss-development mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
