commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dmitri Plotnikov" <dmi...@plotnix.com>
Subject Re: [clazz] Some general thoughts on the design
Date Sat, 09 Nov 2002 21:16:25 GMT
Victor,

----- Original Message -----
From: "Victor Volle" <victor.volle@gmxpro.net>
To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" <commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 12:58 PM
Subject: [clazz] Some general thoughts on the design


> Dmitri,
>
> your design reflects a decision I am currently having
> to make. So I would like to discuss the
> two possibilities and think about the possible
> suitability to [clazz].
>
> We have some interfaces but no (abstract) default
> implementation. That means: for each
> ClazzLoader XXX we have to provide our own
> implementation of XXXClazz, XXXClazzProperty etc.
> Even if only the "building", "filling" of the
> Clazz is different. All XXXClazz implementations
> will probably have a list of (declared) Operations, a List
> of (declared) Fields, some methods to find all fields
> (as opposed to the declared ones).
> So I am thinking that we could factor out
> a common default implementation for Clazz, ClazzProperty.
> And let the ClazzLoaders do the work.
> When you look at your implementation of ReflectedProperty,
> there is nearly nothing reflection specific.
>
> I fear that I might be missing something.
> What do you think?
I agree 100%.  It's just I wanted to have at least two implementations of
these interfaces before we decide what belongs in those common support
classes.

> Associated with this line of thought is the handling
> of "Attributes" (MetaData). MetaData could be
> factored out into some abstract super class
> MetaModelElement.
Absolutely.

>
> Victor

Thank you,

- Dmitri


--
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