Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-avalon-dev-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 10317 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2002 09:13:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO nagoya.betaversion.org) (192.18.49.131) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Dec 2002 09:13:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 24045 invoked by uid 97); 9 Dec 2002 09:14:23 -0000 Delivered-To: qmlist-jakarta-archive-avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 24012 invoked by uid 97); 9 Dec 2002 09:14:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact avalon-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Avalon Developers List" Reply-To: "Avalon Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list avalon-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 23996 invoked by uid 98); 9 Dec 2002 09:14:22 -0000 X-Antivirus: nagoya (v4218 created Aug 14 2002) From: "Noel J. Bergman" To: "Avalon Developers List" Subject: RE: [PROPOSAL] Context Defined Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 04:13:10 -0500 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 In-Reply-To: <200212091910.33165.peter@realityforge.org> Importance: Normal X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > On Mon, 9 Dec 2002 13:47, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > > > Assume that we ignore syntactic sugar and access data via "well defined" > > > entrys. So rather than > > > ((FooContext)context).getFooDirectory() > > > we use > > > (File)context.get( "foo:directory" ); > > Those are not equivalent. > from a components point of view they are. One is syntactic sugar for the > other. No they are not. In the former case, my client code has a declared dependency on something called FooContext for reasons having nothing to do with what I actually wish to accomplish. In the latter case, all I my class depends upon is the basic Context interface, and the desired object type: File. I do not care HOW I get the File object that represents a directory. I could not care less about some "FooContext", "BarContext", or ... in this case ... what is apparently a FUBarContext. > > In the former case, context IS-A FooContext. In > > the latter case, context need only HAVE-A FooContext (perhaps). > I am sure most people here are comfortable with the difference > between these concepts. I am certainly hoping that your assertion is correct, but at the moment, you'd be hard pressed to prove it. --- Noel -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: For additional commands, e-mail: