On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 10:59:28AM -0400, Rocco Caputo wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 11:13:39AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 09:51:50AM +0200, Artur Bergman wrote:
> > > 01-06-27 07.54, skrev [EMAIL PROTECTED] p� [EMAIL PROTECTED] f�ljande:
>
> [...]
>
> > > Aren't those hooks supposed to be in the object layer, as POE has no concept
> > > of objects.
> >
> > Sessions have most of the properties objects have: aatributes, methods,
> > inheritance, ...
> >
> > but these monitoring features are probably useful, although quite low level :(
>
> Don't confuse sessions and objects. They are entirely different
> things with completely separate purposes. They live in totally
> different design spaces (layers) and have very little at all to do
> with each other.
>
> Sessions have no inherent inheritance.
not build in, but it is easy to do. poe sessions (and nfa's to) look and feel
like objects, have almost all of their properties (depends on the definition
of "object"), thus to users and developers they are objects.
maybe we should just to use better names.
for the object layer i would suggest to use something more in the direction
of component layer or component environment. because bigger apps/components
is what is being addressed mostly.
if we stick to object layer we should make clear that sessions are similar
to objects, but only the object layer puts them into a better environment
with more features etc.
torvald
>
> -- Rocco Caputo / [EMAIL PROTECTED] / poe.perl.org / poe.sourceforge.net
