beehive-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rich Feit <richf...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Move the NetUI generic Factory in to the utils or core package?
Date Fri, 24 Jun 2005 16:50:08 GMT
Hi Carlin,

This makes sense to me.  As to getting a Factory from the 
ServletContainerAdapter, would it be possible to have the method 
signature take a base Class instead of String?  Seems like we can avoid 
finding a classloader and loading the class each time, and in most cases 
we'd be passing a statically-known Class.

Rich

Carlin Rogers wrote:

>All,
>
>I'm implementing a way to get a URLTemplateFactory from the 
>ServletContainerAdapter. However, I'm not sure a specific
>method like this follows with the other methods that a
>ServletContainerAdapter implementation provides.
>
>One thought would be I'd like to have a generic way to get 
>a Factory from the the ServletContainerAdapter given a
>class name.
>
>We already do this using class names from the config file.
>The generic Factory class is in the pageflow package.
>It would be great to move this to the utils or core package
>of NetUI. Then I could also add this to the ServletContainerAdapter.
>I would also move the FactoryConfig class as well as we
>already have other Config support in utils.
>
>I don't think Factory or FactoryConfig are used by or
>exposed to beehive users. It should be a safe move to make.
>
>Opinions or concerns? Or other ideas for providing a generic
>way to create a Factory from a container specific implementation?
>
>Thanks,
>Carlin
>
>  
>

Mime
View raw message