marc fleury wrote:
> Ok! I will give you that one, one or two depths but no more!
Never said anything else, did I?
> you get me
> every time you devilish little thing.... I get all puffed up and I say "No
> Rickard!" (tail wagging) "No more 10 depth hierarchies....Rickard!" but
> then you get me and when I come back the stuff looks like a pyramid of
> classes, and then I look closer I realize we do in 43 classes what we use to
> do in 2... woo woo!!! real design? where is my gun?
I have no idea what you are talking about. Oh, but that's true. Back in
EJBoss 1.0 I do remember the "container" being in more or less 1 class.
So, guilty as charged then... <g>
> Actually I am pulling your leg, you don't do it *that* bad, ok you did in
> the EJX metadata stuff but that is ok (remember the
> getContext().getContext().getContext().getContext (/outofbreath)? stuff???)
I will reiterate that the getContext() stuff was simply a terribly minor
implementation detail. You wanna bring that up again?
> but really that is ok and I AGREE with you that the extensions in the
> container are good and useful.
Thank you.
> Let's not get in religious arguments over "I like my hierarchies with 2 or 3
> depths, but no more".
Well, you know how I react when you do the "design sucks" thing. I turn
reddish. :-/
> I really believe that factorization is a "late stage" excercise. Good
> design (like the one you did) doesn't go overboard with abstract classes and
> "implements pedantable, unreliable, unreadable" classes.
True. I just pointed it out since MessageBeans is around the corner and
the property factorization will be pretty apparent.
/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]
