--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2001, Mel Martinez wrote:
>
> > --- Steve Downey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > I must admit to not being totally sure whether
> > co-opting the current 'Constants' and 'Options'
> class
> > families is the best naming for this, but they do
> > clearly indicate the difference in scope. I could
>
> My preference would be to completely drop the
> Constants,
> and keep each "constant" in the class where it
> belongs
> ( but this is personal taste ).
>
Yeah, I agree. I just didn't know if I wanted to go
through the pain of chopping these up too much just
yet. After thinking about it though, I think instead
of extending these I will create separate classes for
the toolkit factory roles. How about the names:
org.apache.jasper34.DefaultToolkit (a class)
org.apache.jasper34.RuntimeToolkit (an interface)
A given adapter implementation would provide it's own
RuntimeToolkit implementation. I think by making
these separate from the current Constants and Options
classes I've just simplified a bunch of things -
namely the ability to later on attack those two
classes.
> One big issue is that we should avoid
> over-engineering this.
> We need to improve jasper and do a refactoring - as
> a number
> of small code moves and interface changes. Then we
> can
> evaluate the result and maybe repeat it.
>
Don't worry, most of the difficulty I'm having is over
the names to use in the proposal. Yes, they will be
subject to change after that, but you know how they
tend to stick...
>
> I would sugest to move to a vote, create the
> proposal/jasper34,
> do a first step ( like the JspServlet changes you
> want, or
> the new packages - but with minimal interface
> changes ), evaluate
> the result and maybe do another iteration.
>
> Mel, please don't try to resolve all the problems in
> one step
> or as a "block" design ( or a "perfect" initial
> design )
Don't worry, this is going to be a very focused first
step that, like I said, focuses mainly on JspServlet.
I've got the advantage of being able to leverage
something I already built. The only major thing I'm
changing is to try to break my existing factory model
into something more flexible for future refactoring of
other parts of Jasper by using the two tiers
described.
I don't have the time to do much more than that! That
Damn Day Job(tm) keeps getting in the way! :-)
Mel
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail.
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text
