commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Berin Loritsch <>
Subject Re: [clazz] Type-based or instance-based metadata? Take II
Date Sun, 27 Oct 2002 01:50:29 GMT
Adam Murdoch wrote:
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Stephen Colebourne []
>>Sent: Sunday, 27 October 2002 9:22 AM
>>To: Jakarta Commons Developers List
>>Subject: Re: [clazz] Type-based or instance-based metadata? Take II
>>This kind of interface is OK, and should be provided. Its essentially the
>>equivalent to BeanUtils class in [beanutils].
>>However, we should focus first on getting the new class/instance model
>>defined. Users can then call a method on the model object intead
>>of a static
>>utility class.
> Definitely.  This makes it easier to give the client to control things like
> which meta-info implementation to use for the model (assuming they are
> pluggable), and policies for dealing with the object graph (like, for
> example, whether it should be 'type-based' or 'instance-based').
> Getting rid of the statics (or having them as a convenience only) means the
> meta-info model will fit nicely into a component-oriented or IoC
> environment.

Utility classes like StringUtils and such that do not store state, or
cache instances are perfectly acceptable in all environments.  There is
no way unauthorized access to information that does not belong to
unauthorized objects.

Anything that should store state or cache values should not be static.


"They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
  deserve neither liberty nor safety."
                 - Benjamin Franklin

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message