Re: Why J2ME?

Berin Loritsch wrote:
>>From: Stefano Mazzocchi [mailto:[email protected]]
>>
>>Like I said, I fear the consequences of a 'one size fits all' 
>>framework 
>>or common-denominator-down-your-throwt.
> 
> 
> The major difference between the Avalon ME (for lack of a better
> name) and the regular container is that ME will be static--the
> classes needed for running the container will be pregenerated.
> 
> 
> 
>>But say that the JCP comes up with the concept of metadata built into 
>>Java 1.5 (Avalon will need that in the future) but they decide, for 
>>simplicity and cost of implementation, to leave this feature 
>>out of J2ME.
>>
>>What do we do? ignore a nice feature that 90% of our users 
>>would love to 
>>have because it's not available on J2ME?
> 
> 
> 
> No.  We interpret it at build time, and provide generated helper
> classes that the ME runtime uses.  I.e. we trade run-time discovery
> of components and component metadata for compile-time discovery
> of components and component metadata.
> 
> That is the distinction.  Nothing more.

Fair enough.

I'm not against build-time additions that will make Avalon more J2ME 
friendly, as long as J2SE remains the top priority for normal Avalon 
operations.

-- 
Stefano Mazzocchi                               <[email protected]>
--------------------------------------------------------------------