Return-Path: 
 <cocoon-dev-return-34864-apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive=xml.apache.org@xml.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org
Received: (qmail 80579 invoked by uid 500); 9 Jan 2003 08:35:42 -0000
Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org>
Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org
Received: (qmail 80541 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2003 08:35:42 -0000
From: "Carsten Ziegeler" <cziegeler@s-und-n.de>
To: <cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org>
Subject: RE: Defining Source  Interfaces
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2003 09:30:53 +0100
Message-ID: <LKENJPKDAIKAPKHEOCMMKEFHCEAA.cziegeler@s-und-n.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.6604 (9.0.2911.0)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0301081727580.14657-100000@vern.chem.tu-berlin.de>
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Importance: Normal
X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release
 5.0.8 |June
 18, 2001) at 09.01.2003 09:35:52,
	Serialize by Router on PBSN1/Systeme und Netzwerke(Release 5.0.8 |June 18,
 2001) at
 09.01.2003 09:35:53,
	Serialize complete at 09.01.2003 09:35:53
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N


Stephan Michels wrote:
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> >
> > Now, think if an implementation for copy(). Each Source implementation
> > must test if the destination is the same source implementation or not.
> > If not use IS/OS if yes use optimized etc.
> 
> agreed.
> 
> > So, if we are using these "marker" interfaces for all other parts, I
> > really think we should add a "MoveableSource" (substitute the 
> name if you
> > like)
> 
> I thought these operations are a kind of writing operations.
> 
> > and have an utility class check if:
> > a) both sources have the same implementation and
> > b) implement MoveableSource
> > If both is answered with yes, this can be used - if not the 
> utility class
> > uses IS/OS copying.
> 
> I like code sippets ;-)

sippets? :) (ok, just kidding)

> 
> class MySource implements MoveableSource
> {
>  void copy(Source source)
>  {
>    // impementation depending copy
>  }
> }
> 
> class SourceCopyUtil<whatever>
> {
>  void copy(Source from, Source to)
>  {
>    If ((from instanceof MoveableSource) &&
>        (from.getClass().equals(to.getClass()))
>     // impementation depending copy
>     ((MoveableSource)from).copy(to);
>    else
>     IS/OS copy
>  }
> }
> 
> Something like that?
> 
Exactly.

Would you suggest to have two interfaces, one for copying
and one for moving? 
Or is it ok, to implement a move as a copy/delete?

Carsten

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org