cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sylvain Wallez <>
Subject Re: CForms "static final" widget definitions
Date Tue, 17 Feb 2004 21:40:41 GMT
Tim Larson wrote:

>On Mon, Feb 16, 2004 at 10:14:43PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>>Tim Larson wrote:
>>>I would like to make the WidgetDefinition objects be "static final", so 
>[Note: This should have read: "private final".]
>>>the compiler can help us respect the definitions by preventing us from 
>>>changing them in ways that are not thread-safe.
>>Uh? Can you elaborate on why some definitions could be not thread-safe? 
>>AFAIK, once configured, the widget definitions serve only as factories.
>Example definition which sports a non-thread-safe method:
>  formmodel/
>    private boolean required;
>    public void setRequired(boolean required);
>For more examples like this, just look for more setSomething
>methods in the widget definition classes.
>We are careful when we call these set* methods so we have not had
>problems, but wouldn't it be nice to let the language help document
>and enforce the "configure once, use as a factory thereafter" model?

As I said in my previous post (sorry, not much interactivity as I 
currently use a dialup connection), wanting removing all modifiers can 
make the code difficult to write. We should better enforce this through 
a "makeReadOnly" method.

Another way would be by merging the WidgetDefinitionBuilder into the 
WidgetDefinition, as has been done for the TreeProcessor in 2.2. I have 
to think a bit more about this, but it's IMO the way to go (and would 
remove 1/3 of the classes!)


Sylvain Wallez                                  Anyware Technologies 
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance  -

View raw message