RE: [picocontainer-dev] [6.2/6.0] Re: [picocontainer-dev] Bug or feature?
Jörg Schaible <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.java.picocontainer.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Konstantin Priblouda wrote: > --- Jörg Schaible <[email protected]> > > >> Well, this was, how it was in Pico 1.0 and it was >> removed for Pico 1.1. Sere closed issues for >> reasoning ... Actually IIRC at was changed quite immediately before 1.0 was released ... I am no longer sure. > > At the moment I see PICO-203, and no reasoning... Well, I try to remember, it was 2 or 3 years agao ... Main reasoning was, that keeping a pointer in any CA for the Pico is a simply waste and the coupling may arise even problems. The Pico is only necessary at resolution time, therefore it was provided with the CA's interface. No need for the CA to keep the refernce also. Additionally it made problems when the CA was saved in a session, since it triggered always the complete Pico hierarchy. The CA instance was meant to be a fly-weigh type, therefore also my steady proposal to drop the key also. Why is it interesting for the CA to know the key that key that have been used to store it in the Pico? - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list please visit: http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email