On Mon, 05 Jun 2000, you wrote:
> Secondly on further reflection we _could_ use the WebMacro context tool
> API - having looked at the ContextTool interface we would be able to
> retrieve the RunData out of the tool's backpointer to the context (but
> the retrieval would have to be lazy to avoid looking for it before
> Turbine had stuffed it in there).
> However it would mean renaming all the relevant classes and having them
> extend ContextTool.
This is only a few at this point. So if where going to change it now's
the time.
Here's what I'm thinking - the WebMacro integration in Turbine is for
use within Turbine. Not with WebMacro itself. In other words, I think
we should optimize where it makes sense. But at the same time be
careful not to make it a maint. nightmare.
What if we extended WebContext and added the method:
wm.newInstance( RunData ) as opposed to req, resp. This way we can pass
the RunData object to the tools when they're init(). At first glance,
this seems to be the only change needed.
This would allow us to use the ContexTools interface for our tools and
add our tools to the Wm properties file. This would be very clean for
adding new ones.
thoughts?
--
dave
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------
Just your average Joe armed with an Emacs editor.
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
