The problem is that i need to build dedicated service to handle whiteList and blackList for each service that requires different configuration if i don't want to manipulate Map, it will create 2*n + n instance of services for services that requires a WhiteListManager and a BlackListManager. By extending an abstract service, i would only have n services instances to achieve the same goal if i could provide multiple Configuration to contribution methods.
Regards, Christophe. 2010/2/4 Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo <thiag...@gmail.com> > On Thu, 04 Feb 2010 13:20:04 -0200, Kristian Marinkovic < > kristian.marinko...@porsche.co.at> wrote: > > as with the activation context i think it would be very >> error prone (from my exprience). what if you really >> swap the parameter positions, consider more than >> two parameters. i think the chance to create bugs that >> cannot be detected by unit tests increases. except you >> have very good integration tests. >> but... if we had additional positional annotations >> or an own marker annotation to distinguish them.... >> > > Would this solution lead to more harder-to-understand, error-prone code? I > think so, as we have a simple solution for that (creating one service for > each configuration). > > -- > Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo > Independent Java, Apache Tapestry 5 and Hibernate consultant, developer, > and instructor > Owner, software architect and developer, Ars Machina Tecnologia da > Informação Ltda. > http://www.arsmachina.com.br > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tapestry.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tapestry.apache.org > > -- Regards, Christophe Cordenier. Developer of wooki @wookicentral.com
