Nathan Bubna wrote: ...
> further, i think that so far you have failed to make a good case for the > varying environments being similar enough that this is a reasonable > proposal. you say that most environments have a concept of 'request' and > 'global' scopes. i disagree. most environments have some idea of *local* > and 'global' scopes. the difference there is significant i think! > 'local'/'global' refers to the visibility of a variable whereas the > 'request'/'global' concept in a servlet environment is not one of visibility > but of lifecycle! i remain unable to envision a reasonable tool management > system that can appropriately handle such varying concepts, and i think it > is unwise to try and make one. seriously, if you see some pressing reason > to create a tool management system for another environment, then i recommend > you implement it separately. if you still think the two can be unified into > a more generic system, then feel free to do so. at least then you will > have a better understanding of what is involved in tool management for other > environments. at this point, i see no benefit to trying to abstract a > generic tool manager from the current one. there is enough other work to be > done on this project that is far more pressing. I am not trying to create a generic tool management BUT generic tools! You think too far. All I propose are some minor changes to (hopefully) allow widest possible reuse of tools and make sure that tool handling is safe and efficient. In addition I want to get the naming right so that working with tools is intuitive. In your current proposal you have a contract between tool classes and the toolbox manager that is defined in the documentation. I'd like to define this as part of a Java interface because this allows checks that everything is well and right (You have some checks in your proposal but there are still situations where things can go wrong. Ugly things can happen if a tool ends up in the wrong scope. It will load and work nicely but return wrong results because it operates on old data). Implemenation-wise it's a minor change to what you propose. I'll write that code and then we can go from there. The majority of tools will never have to worry about interfaces etc. because they don't need any special treatment. Gabe -- Gabriel Sidler Software Engineer, Eivycom GmbH, Zurich, Switzerland -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
