Re: [picocontainer-dev] [6.2/6.0] Re: [picocontainer-dev] Bug or feature?

--- Paul Hammant <[email protected]> wrote:

>        T getComponentInstance(PicoContainer
> container) throws  
> PicoCompositionException;
> 
> .... only requires a container instance to be passed
> in at  
> getComponent time.  Which ref is passed in ?  parent
> or child ?

That's differs in current trunk code base...

When you use container.getComponent(key) it looks up
the adapter and then passes  itself ( leaf )

When you use containt.getInstance(CA) it finds
container hosting this CA and passes it.

Weird what? 


> It might be nice for the one that the
> getComponent(..) is being  
> invoked on to exclusively be passed around for all
> resolves - though  
> that requires a lot of thought before we change
> things.


I would prefer that CA is always resolved against own
container... This can be achieved by:
 - keeping reference to container in CA ( say, while
registering ) 

 - walking down the root  everywhere where user can
pass container to ca. 

Anyay, do users have any need to use CA besides 
registering components in a weird way? 


BTW, another question arises during refactoring:

is it wise to cache result of adapter resolution in
parameters? 

regards,

regards,

----[ Konstantin Pribluda http://www.pribluda.de ]----------------
JTec quality components: http://www.pribluda.de/projects/


      ____________________________________________________________________________________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs

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

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email