Now I'm re-thinking my "seems reasonable." Lol. Nick
On Aug 16, 2013, at 5:13 PM, Remko Popma wrote: > I'm not sure. What would the code look like if we introduce this > subinterface? Do we pass Layout to Appenders or PagedLayouts? Would we need > to check with instanceof? This does introduce complexity. > > Paying the cost of complexity would be fine if we get some benefit in return, > but what would that benefit be in this case? > > The current protocol for layouts that are not paged is to return null headers > and footers. This is handled by the AbstractLayout class that is the > superclass of all Layout implementations. > > How is PagedLayout going to improve this? IMO it should bring substantial > benefit for the additional complexity it will bring... > > Remko > > > On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 6:30 AM, Nick Williams > <[email protected]> wrote: > Seems reasonable. > > Nick > > On Aug 16, 2013, at 1:07 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: > >> In Layout I see (my bold): >> >> /** >> * Returns the format for the layout format. >> * @return The footer. >> * @doubt the concept of header and footer is not universal, should not >> be on the base interface. >> * (RG) I agree with this. >> */ >> byte[] getFooter(); >> >> /** >> * Returns the header for the layout format. >> * @return The header. >> * @doubt the concept of header and footer is not universal, should not >> be on the base interface. >> * (RG) I agree with this. >> */ >> byte[] getHeader(); >> >> So do we want: >> >> public interface PagedLayout<T extends Serializable> extends Layout<T> { >> byte[] getHeader(); >> byte[] getFooter(); >> } >> >> ? >> >> "PagedLayout" is just a placeholder name, alts welcome. >> >> Gary >> -- >> E-Mail: [email protected] | [email protected] >> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >> JUnit in Action, Second Edition >> Spring Batch in Action >> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory > >
