On Wednesday 29 October 2003 20:54, Stephen McConnell wrote: > Vjeran Marcinko wrote: > >That would probably be better solution, because if I just use Broker > > component, objects that it would return from it's select(runtimeArgument) > > method would be plain java objects constructed inside that method, and > > not Avalon components that would use all features of Avalon container. > > Not necessarily - its a pure implementation decision.
I think the agreeable bottom line is that it very much depends on your requirements. I have the feeling that you are fishing for something like; "I want to use the components A, B and C that are already available, but I can't provide the Configuration for each of these until some point later in time." Then your choice is very much falling towards nested Merlin instances. If you don't have a bunch of components, then there are many ways to attack the problem, and I am the first to acknowledge the KISS factor, and "Broker Pattern" is one such simple way of doing things. I think that if you provided a complete description of what you have in mind, I think Stephen can provide you with a spot on way to do it. Hmmmm, Looking back at your original post, I suddenly got the eire feeling that you somehow draw an equal sign between an EJB and a Avalon Component. Tell me it wasn't so. Avalon Components are not data containers like EJBs, but more like functional subsystems. An Avalon Component will typically consist of a whole bunch of associated classes, some providing function, some data containment and some both. J2EE doesn't have the notion of Components. Niclas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
