Quoting Rickard Öberg <[email protected]>:
On 2010-07-07 13.34, Edward Yakop wrote:
In general, to keep things aligned with DCI, I think I'd prefer
"withRoles" instead of "withAbilities" as previously discussed. What
do you think?
It feels more natural in terms of UL.
Do you think that we needs to stop at withMixins() ?
How do we address "For some roles, we would need x Concerns and x
Side-effects to be declared?"
I think this will be orthogonal to the already existing
functionality. We already have ability to declare additional
concerns, side-effects and mixin implementations. All we need is to
be able to add more interfaces (=roles) that we want the composite
to implement.
So the main difference is that when we resolve the composite,
instead of just implementing the composite type, we also add the
additionally declared roles, and then the usual algorithms for
selecting mixin, concerns and side-effects apply.
So the DomainEntityComposite itself does not need to extend all role
interfaces? Will roles be able to hold another roles in them? And
implementation-wise, Will there be @Role -injection in a style of
@This -injection?
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
