Jean-Sebastien Delfino wrote:
Raymond Feng wrote:
I think Simon's proposal should work as follows instead of passing the
properties to the createInvoker() call.
public interface Invoker {
InvokerProperties getProperties(); // Contribute properties
}
public class InvokerProperties {
public void setAllowsPassByReference(boolean allowsPBR) {
....
}
public boolean allowsPassByReference() {
....
}
// Add more properties without impacting the Invoker interface
public AnotherPropertyType getAnotherProperty() {
...
}
public void setAnotherProperty(AnotherPropertyType anotherProp) {
...
}
}
I'm going to repeat what I said earlier in this thread, but in context
now with your code example: This makes extensions depend on a Tuscany
implementation class, InvokerProperties.
The getProperties() method will look like {
return new InvokerProperties();
}
A very slippery slope IMHO.
>
I agree that this is not desirable. I think the original version that
I proposed has a cleaner separation between Tuscany code and extension code,
even though it has a slightly larger set of changes. See [1] for an
explanation of te design rationale behind my proposal.
Simon
[1] http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg28292.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
