directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <david_jen...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: [LDAP] Removing LdapMessageHandler interface
Date Wed, 14 Mar 2007 20:37:58 GMT

On Mar 14, 2007, at 4:17 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny wrote:

> Enrique Rodriguez a écrit :
>
>> On 3/14/07, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecharny@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> ...
>>> I bet that would not be a good idea to remove  
>>> LdapMessageHandler : it's
>>> use to initialize MINA. We iterate through all the declared  
>>> handler in
>>> LdapProtocolProvider and initialize each handler using reflection...
>>
>>
>> Actually, it would leave MINA's MessageHandler in the hierarchy, so
>> the casting just switches to MessageHandler instead of
>> LdapMessageHandler.  MINA typically uses MessageHandler to do
>> demuxing, anyway.
>
> LdapMessageHandler extends MessageHandler.
>
>> In fact, this refactoring would open up the
>> possibility of directly using the demux handler in MINA.   
>> Furthermore,
>> it is MessageHandler that provides the method messageReceived that is
>> used in the current handler demux.  The init() method of
>> LdapMessageHandler is called with the cfg but it is unnecessary.
>
> It's unnecessary now, but we migth use it later. In my mind, having  
> an intermedirary interface for Ldap message does not harm, and can  
> have some advantages, in the futur. It would be a pity that we have  
> to reintroduce this interface later for some unknown usage...


I haven't looked at this code, but in my experience even when I'm  
quite sure I know exactly how some currently unused feature that  
someone else is stubbing their toes on is going to support some great  
new feature planned for the future, when I'm actually implementing  
the new feature there's a better way to do it.

popularized as "YAGNI" -- "you ain't gonna need it"

thanks
david jencks

>
>>
>> This is really a trivial change.  In fact I did it already locally to
>> make sure it would work perfectly.
>
> At this point, I guess that Alex may have a better knowledge of  
> this piece of code, and about the reason we have this interface in  
> the first place...
>
> Alex ?
>
>>
>> Enrique
>>
>


Mime
View raw message