Quoting Niclas Hedhman <[email protected]>:
Stanislav,
What Rickard is discussing is that for Constraints it is possible to declare
on the constraint annotation itself which implementation it should be, OR
declare them on the Composite like Concerns.
He is arguing for and against whether to allow the same pattern for
Concerns, which I think in many cases makes sense, for instance
@UnitOfWorkPropagation.
-- Niclas
Aah, well I think I understood most of it, but I didn't find any clear
opinion on whether any of pros/cons he represented was more common /
important than others. And how it all would generally fit into idea of
core developers of what is 'good' and what is 'bad'.
That said, purely from coding-perspective and 'using Qi4j', making
Concerns like Constraints in declaration-matter, would make some
things easier / more elegant / more consistent.
Speaking of declaration of fragments, how about wild idea of making
all mixin/concern/side-effect declarations contextual ones? Or would
that be too much bother for application-developers? :)
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
