avalon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Nicola Ken Barozzi <nicola...@apache.org>
Subject Re: tweety 1.0.1-alpha is available
Date Thu, 04 Jul 2002 07:51:29 GMT

Leo Simons wrote:
>>Leo Simons wrote:
>>
>>>all,
>>>
>>>tweety is ready to go online. Dist are at
>>>
>>>http://cvs.apache.org/~leosimons/excalibur/tweety/
>>
>>cool :-)
>>
>>Leo, I still think that having made the main class a Component itself 
>>with the lifecycle methods is confusing for early users, as well as the 
>>fact that main() makes it call them on itself :-S
> 
> 
> hmm. having main() instantiate a copy of itself is, I think, quite
> common behaviour. 

Which I don't like much.

 > The alternative is to have another class, called Main,
> that instantiates Tweety. Wonder what is clearer.

IMO the second.

>>I would just revert to the old behaviour which is more simple, and 
>>thought you kinda agreed on this...
>>
>>What do you think?
> 
> Like I said earlier (I think), not making Tweety a component would be an
> example of bad design. If you just use tweety, you just type 'ant run'
> and never deal with anything of its internals, so the *exposed*
> behaviour is exactly the same. If you want to look at the source to
> Tweety to learn what it does, I think it is very important that the
> source is well-written according to our own standards.

Less is more.
If we want to explain how Container-Component works, we should make a 
Container and Components, not A Container that is a Component and a 
Component.

Making everything a Component has lead to the misuse we have in Cocoon, 
and this only encourages it.

> And the less pronounced motive is that I'm sure people will be misusing
> Tweety, for example putting it inside phoenix or somethin'. While I
> 'officially' disprove, I can see why =)

Hey, this is why I *don't* want Tweety itself to be a Component.
If it is, as now, users *will* ignore main and use it as a Component.

Sorry, but I don't understand Leo, it seems confusing to me what you say.

I want Tweety *not* to have lifecycle methods.
Lifecycle methods help in IoC, but if it calls them on himself it's a 
very bad programming example.
There is no inversion, no clear Container-Component separation.

-- 
Nicola Ken Barozzi                   nicolaken@apache.org
             - verba volant, scripta manent -
    (discussions get forgotten, just code remains)
---------------------------------------------------------------------


--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:avalon-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>


Mime
View raw message