commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Essl <christiane...@yahoo.de>
Subject Re: [HiveMind] Interceptors - CGLIB / Javassist comparison
Date Fri, 05 Mar 2004 22:55:33 GMT
Oh yes I agree. I like the idea too. One set of interceptors per service 
makes things more clear.

The only thing which concerns me is that the 'which implementation for 
service' problem returns.

I am not sure wheter there is already resolved but still I was dreaming a 
bit on this problem and have to say I like this Spring hierarchy.

So I tought maybe a module could extend another module. Inheriting 
everything it does not overwrite. And than have injection based a third 
xml-file where <use module="a" for="b"> are defined.

But thats propably no new idea.

P.S.: Sorry I didn't check the documentation-source. The web-site is 
actually that up-to date that I get lazy.

On Fri, 5 Mar 2004 16:29:41 -0500, Howard M. Lewis Ship 
<hlshiplists@comcast.net> wrote:

>> Howard - if I remember right - last time on interceptor
>> ordering you said
>> something about bundles of interceptors. It did not realy
>> understand that.
>
> The issue is that if you contribute multiple interceptors to a service 
> extension point, you have to
> be concerned with order. This is an offshoot of the fact that any module 
> may contribute interceptors
> to any service extension point.  This extreme case complicates things 
> for the simple case.
>
> But what if you contribute a group of interceptors as a single 
> contribution? i.e.
>
> <implementation service-id="...">
>   <interceptor-group>
>     <interceptor service-id="A"/>
>     <interceptor service-id="B"/>
>   </>
> </>
>
> This clearly orders A before B and there's no guesswork, since the group 
> is contributed as a whole.
>
> Another option to explore is defining "sets" of interceptors to be 
> contributed (possibly as a group
> with known ordering).  So:
>
> <implementation service-id="...">
>    <interceptor-set set-id="Foo"/>
> </>
>
> <interceptor-set id="Foo">
>   <interceptor service-id="A"/>
>   <interceptor service-id="B"/>
> </>
>
> Perhaps the entire idea of contributing just an individual interceptor 
> is flawed; perhaps they
> should always be applied as a set or group, with the restriction that 
> only a single set/group may be
> applied.  Then we are no longer concerned with order.
>
> --
> Howard M. Lewis Ship
> Independent J2EE / Open-Source Java Consultant
> Creator, Tapestry: Java Web Components
> http://howardlewisship.com
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org



-- 
Christian Essl 

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


Mime
View raw message