Michael Hunger wrote:
> Another thing:
>
> If no scope (null) is supplied to the dependency visitor it will visit no
> dependency at all. I thought null here as an
> match always case (otherwise you would have asserted not null in the
> constructor?).
>
> if( scope != null && dependencyModel.matchesScope(scope))
> {
> visitDependency( dependencyModel );
> }
>
> So, perhaps an:
>
> if( scope == null || dependencyModel.matchesScope(scope))
> {
> visitDependency( dependencyModel );
> }
>
> Would be more appropriate?
Indeed :-)
> Regarding the filtering for scope, perhaps an Specification (Evans, Fowler ->
> discussed on the ddd list) approach would
> be even better to have model classes respond to queries for certain
> information/filtering.
That would of course be even better, yes :-)
/Rickard
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
