> From: peter reilly [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > My comments in-line: > > On Monday 28 April 2003 16:35, Costin Manolache wrote: > > To keep things simple and make it easier to get an agreement - > > let's let adapters out, and focus on the core issue. > > > > IMO it seems what everything leads to is the need to extend > > the introspection patterns with another case. Let's agree > > on this pattern first. > > > > Assuming: > > > > <parent> > > <myChild> > > </parent> > > > > If ParentClass has no addMyChild()/createMyChild() method, > we'll need > > to look up in some table and find a class associated with <myChild>. > > ( it can be the "roles" table, or just the typedef table, > or some other > > table that uses the context info or adapters ). > > > > Then we'll find some interfaces associated with > MyChildClass - either all > > interfaces, all interfaces and base classes, or only an explicit set > > declared in some other data strucutures. Each of the > interface will be > > a potential role. > > > > We'll then look in ParentClass for an add method with that > particular > > interface as parameter. > > > > > > The points of disagreement: > > > > - should we add a separate table for <child>->class > association - or just > > use the typedef ? > > We should use the contents of typedef >
This will not do for vendor cases and such. See my comments to Contin. > > > > - Should we use (<parent>, <child>) tuple to find the > class? Should we use > > (ParentClass, <parent>, <child>) tuple ? Or just <child> name - i.e. > > context-free ? > > The name should be context-free. > -1 you need the context of usage. > > > > - try all interfaces - or have some data structures to > restrict to only a > > subset ? > > Use java rules, (try all interfaces) > The parent will tell you what interfaces to use. No need for wild searches. > > > > - addComponent( MyRole ) or addMyRole( MyRole ) or both ? > > I.e. a fixed-name method, with overloading to support > multiple roles, > > or one add method per role ? > > add(ElementClass) to be consistent with other ant method > matching patterns. > I prefer just supporting addConfigured, the reason being that makes little sense passing a non configured object of an unknown implementation to the parent. What does it possible can do to it, before it gets configured? > > In the second case, we'll need some additional metadata to associate > > the role interface with the suffix of the add method. > > ( MyRole -> org.apache.tools.ant.MyRoleInterface ) > > > > - should setComponent be used to indicate single-child ? ( > of course, all > > primitives that can be used as attributes will remain attributes ) > > No, setComponent() should just of an attribute > 'component="value"' as per > current ant method pattern matching/ > Agreed. Jose Alberto > Peter > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
