Re: [picocontainer-dev] Thoughts about parameters / simplification of interface

Konstantin Priblouda wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> Well, now we have 3 types of parameters ( constant ,
> component and config )  - and they are present on
> interface.
> 
> Paul points, that it is somehow uncool to pass all the
> "newed" parameters to
> MPC.addComponent(key,compOrInst,params...)
> and there shall be a better way to do this.
> 
> It just came to my mind while awaking from morning
> coma
> ( our train drivers are on strike, so I have to
> carpool
> with some really early birds ;) )

You hitch-hike freight trains, do you ? Hehehehe

> thet we can as well sack those parameters from
> interface, and use just objects instead with following
> logic:
> 
> null:  resolve by type
> not null:
>    try as key
>      if exists and type match -> ComponentParameter
>      if exists and type is string -> ConfigParameter (
> try to convert)
>      if not exists
>         if type match  treat as constant parameter
>         if not and string  try to convert (like config
> paramater)
> 
> Null parameter array would mean greediest staisfiable,
> empty array - default constructor.

Sounds good. A String component/constant does not make too much sense anyway
and if it does not refer a ConfigParam the behaviour is as before. Fine.
 
> Thus signature becomes:
> MPC.addComponent(key,compOrInst,Object...)
> 
> Of course we shall keep component adapter construction
> with explicit specification of parameters.
> 
> WDYT?

Reasonable.

- Jörg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email