commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rahul Akolkar" <>
Subject Re: [jci] configuration
Date Tue, 08 Aug 2006 00:11:24 GMT
On 8/7/06, Torsten Curdt <> wrote:
> I am currently trying to figure out the configuration part of jci
> ...and at the moment I am really torn apart which way to go.
> Usually I am one of those that likes static typing ...which is what
> the plexus compiler API (and the javac implementation of jci) uses.
> Having a configuration class with setters like
>   settings.setVerbose(boolean)
> ...but looking at the native eclipse compiler implementation (which is
> just using a map)
>   settings.put(settings.OPTION, settings.OPTION_VALUE)

Its a very eclipsy thing to do, OSGi bundles and services pass
java.util.Dictionary instances around (that API has been around for a
while) for the very reasons you state below. "Standard" property keys
are defined by the framework (all keys are Strings).

> I am really tempted to go that way. The interface would be so much
> easier and way more extensible. The compilers could pick the options
> they need and warn about options they don't understand.
> As very often the configuration does not come from a statically typed
> resource anyway (like a xml or properties file) the static API might
> not even that convenient at all.
> Opinions?

Not a bad idea, just needs lot of Javadocs.


> cheers
> --
> Torsten

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

View raw message