On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 3:28 PM, Rickard Öberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'm not really fond of this at all. You are putting way too much stuff > into a dumb value container. isValid() should be in the Entity that > holds this PasswordValue. The state of a Value should be exposed > directly, i.e. no private stuff, so no need for equivalent of stateFor(). This explains a lot of my mail just sent. You see ValueComposites as DTOs, which I disagree with. There is nothing inherent with Values that makes them "dumb value container", and if we are to follow the general guideline, "Avoid Entities as much as possible, and only introduce if the life cycle of it must be tracked." then a vacuum arises and TransientComposite must be used (which means complex persistence). Cheers Niclas -- http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java _______________________________________________ qi4j-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
