Subject: RE: DispatchTask From: Dominique Devienne <DDevienne () lgc ! com> Date: 2004-06-06 17:50:23
> So if I need to derive from something else that DispatchTask, I can simply > implement Dispatchable and don't even need an execute method, since you've > modified the introspection code too. Clever! For now, tasks implementing Dispatchable but extending from oata.Task will not dispatch to non-execute methods. IOW, tasks that are dispatchable must *not* extend from Task... at least currently. > nothing silently, instead of barfing. I personally believe any dispatch task > should require a valid 'action' attribute, and that having a default action > reverting back to execute is counter intuitive and will lead to some > confusion (and requests for help) down the line. > > Let me know what you think about that. Thanks, --DD I can throw a BuildException if the method to be executed is not available, if that is what you think is intuitive. Cheers, Magesh --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
