marc fleury wrote:
> you do that in other parts of the code (factor out metadata information) and
> I don't think it is a good idea. Byproduct of "design talk" but not real.
> So if the variable is in the metadata and you don't need it for
> MessageBeans? well don't use it!!! but don't put a hierarchy of 10 depth
> just to cover simple metadata squeakiness not worth it, really not.
>
> Flat metadata is good (simple), metadata with gazillion hierarchy classes is
> silly... we have been there, done that (twice!) and we know it's useless.
>
> Even though I am no expert on non-object languages, I can relate to the
> critics of java and OO in general that "extensive" hierarchies is OO-goop...
> A little is good, most notably interfaces are good, but the 10 depth
> metadata structures only impress little girls.
Absolutely, and why separate the containers into three separate ones? I
mean, cause like, "DaContainer" would work, right. And it would be,
like, awesome, coz it could do just about anything. You know. And then
and then, like when MessageBeans are implemented, right, it also goes
into DaContainer... like "Resistance is futile" and just assimilate its
bad butt. And then everything is like one class! Whoa! And its like
simple, because I only have to import One Class! YEAH!
Right.
Not.
Don't agree with you, but that's just my silly little OO-head talking.
And I'm not talking "extensive" hear, just two levels, just like the
containers.
/Rickard
--
Rickard �berg
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.telkel.com
http://www.jboss.org
http://www.dreambean.com
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
