[
http://team.ops4j.org/browse/QI-361?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17501#comment-17501
]
Kent Sølvsten commented on QI-361:
----------------------------------
niclas, I was thinking in lines of non-persistent state hidden as fields in
mixins, which are not properties and/or associations.
MapOverrideTest led me to believe that this is/should be possible for
non-persistent ValueComposites.
If all state should be stored inside properties/associations, that would more
or less make the usage of 3rd party classes (JDK classes) as mixin
implementations irelevant - and make the MapOverrideTest completely wrong.
Is the MapOverrideTest still relevant, if it is changed to use a
TransientComposite? Or should it just be deleted?
> "ValueBuilder instances can not be reused."
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: QI-361
> URL: http://team.ops4j.org/browse/QI-361
> Project: Qi4j
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Core Runtime
> Reporter: Niclas Hedhman
> Fix For: 2.0 - Reductionism
>
>
> If you try to use the same ValueBuilder as a cookie-cutter for similar
> values, you will receive the error;
> java.lang.IllegalStateException: ValueBuilder instances cannot be reused
> This defeats the purpose of having the methods prototype() and prototypeFor().
> So, either the names need to change (I don't like that), or the previous
> behavior of prototype instantiation should be supported.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
http://team.ops4j.org/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
_______________________________________________
qi4j-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.ops4j.org/mailman/listinfo/qi4j-dev
