At 13:55 15.01.2002 -0800, Mark Womack wrote:
>> However, do you really need it? Please answer by just
>> yes or no as I would like to discover the reason for
>> myself by studying your code once again.
>
>As currently written, yes.
>
>Stop now if you want to look at the code to see why or keep reading if you
>want my explanation.
OK, I confess. I looked.
[space snip]
><spoiler>
>The Watchdog should not assume that a URL is sufficient to accessing the
>configuration data. It depends on the subclass to access the configuration
>data (presumeably from the element it is watching) in whatever way is
>appropriate and provide it as an InputStream. The data might come from a
>file, a url, or something completely different. The Configurator interface
>only supports a doConfigure method that takes a url. It is my opinion that
>an InputStream is more generic than a URL, and all configurators should be
>able to support InputStream. Unless I am missing something fundamental
>here.
></spoiler>
How about assuming that Watchdog watches URLs, not Files, just
URLs. HTTPWatchdog makes that assumption, why not have FileWatchdog
make it as well? You can always convert a file:// type URL to a
java.io.File. Moreover, the openStream method of java.net.URL can be
used to convert a URL to an inputStream.
IMHO, InputStream is more basic than a URL not more generic. Regards, Ceki
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
