2011/8/8 Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com>: > > +1 to the idea of using the Observer pattern; but -0 for > Observable. I would favor defining Events and Listeners because a) > Observable is concrete, so effectively forces you to create an > Observable delegate > I'm not sure I understand. Components in java.awt also need to implement quite a few methods like addListener, fireEvent, and so on. Maybe we could write a DefaultObservable, which would implement most of the methods required by Observable, and could be inherited by some (probably not all, unfortunately) of the already implemented iterative algorithms ? > > and b) the interface is crude and is really > designed for GUI scenarios where observers are holding references to > the Observable and just being notified that something has changed. > Events are more flexible and can be implemented using interfaces. > Has anyone ever actually used Observable outside of a GUI m/v > environment? Does anyone know of event frameworks suitable for > monitoring long-running computations that we might adapt? > > In any case, I think it is a good idea to develop an event framework > for [math]. We should probably also think about doing this in a way > that is at least JMX-friendly. > > Phil > Browsing through the JavaDoc, I realized that o.a.c.m.ode has some event handling facilities. Is the implementer still around? Sebastien
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
