Brett McLaughlin wrote:
> I am a bit torn on:
>
> public void set(Object ob);
>
> -or-
>
> public void add(Object ob);
>
> If you can come up with 3 cases of services where that would be used, I
> am OK with adding it in. That is my benchmark; if there are 3 times it
> can be used, it makes sense to add it; less than that it is too specific
> to be in a generic contract. add() could also be your update, as you
> check for a name/id of an event and either add/update.
>
I know of at least 2 off the top of my head : Scheduler, GlobalCache.
Someone else know a
third?
So to this point, this is kinda what it may look like -
public interface Service {
public void setName(String name);
public String getName();
public void init(Object ob);
public Object get();
public void set(Object ob); //I can do an ADD and UPDATE here if
needed
public void release(Object ob);
public boolean execute() throws ServiceException;
public void destroy();
}
It's getting closer. Here's what I see -
Service developer - Low level. Gotta think about it. what's a get, set,
release, execute, etc... mean
to my service and how does my service fit that mold.
Service user - No brainer. service.init(o) - service.execute() ...
later!
On track?
dave
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
