commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Juozas Baliuka" <bali...@centras.lt>
Subject Re: [reflect] Proposals:
Date Mon, 17 Jun 2002 06:06:26 GMT

Hi,
I think it is possible to decide about package names later.
1) Stephen, writes proposal and adds his code.
2) All, find code in jakarta about the same and  add the most interesting.
3) All, Eleminate dublication and useless code, decide about package names,
finalize proposal.
4) All, tests, docs .... .

> How about this:  we make this thing explicitly multi-level.  For example,
we
> could have
>
>     org.apache.commons.reflect
>
> for the convenience stuff Ola is describing.
>
> Then, separately, we could have
>
>     org.apache.commons.reflect.introspect
>
> for the framework that builds on ...reflect and provides similar
> conveniences for all kinds of introspection.  Perhaps that's where Steve's
> rules belong.
>
> <dmitri:nag>
> I still think we'd be better of with a more catchy name:
>
> org.apache.commons.jin.reflect
> org.apache.commons.jin.introspect
> </dmitri:nag>
>
> - Dmitri
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ola Berg" <ola.berg@arkitema.se>
> To: <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2002 3:51 PM
> Subject: [reflect] Proposals:
>
>
> > Dimitri wrote:
> > >Perhaps I misunderstood what the proposal was all about. My
understanding
> > >was that it was after introspection rather than pure reflection. When I
> > >hear the word \"reflection\", the list of features that comes to my
mind
> is:
> >
> > No, I don\'t think you misunderstood. Hey, we are trying to make
something
> new here, the limits aren\'t set, borders ain\'t drawn.
> >
> > Reflection in JVM is basically set and very low level. What people
already
> do with reflection/introspection is useful and often very high level. I
> challenged your proposal by trying to draw a sketchy level for this new
> package, placing it somewhere in the middle: make reflection utility for
> often-needed mechanisms, thus supporting (as opposed to implementing) a
lot
> of high level stuff.
> >
> > Using Java reflection is straight forward, once you have the right
Method
> objects. I believe that the low level operations in the package should
deal
> with these two issues:
> >
> > 1) Means to easily select the right set of Methods (hopefully
> dynamically), and defining groups or categories of Methods (just like
> setters are one category of Methods) with some kind of Method category
> definition (a Rule, a Predicate, whatever)
> >
> > 2) Caching of the reflection look-up results, for performance issues.
> >
> > These two are very low-level issues with java.lang.reflect, but I
believe
> important ones.
> >
> > The second question is how high this package should go (in terms of
> \"levels\"), still maintaining a good separation of concerns. Maybe the
> ideas we come up with will result in different packages at different
levels,
> who knows?
> >
> > <ola:self-criticism>
> > Anyway: don\'t limit your thoughts based on anything I come up with. My
> personal signal-to-noise ratio is low, I admit that...
> > </ola:self-criticism>
> >
> > /O
> >
> > --------------------
> > ola.berg@arkitema.se
> > 0733 - 99 99 17
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> <mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
>


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


Mime
View raw message