hc-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bugzi...@apache.org
Subject DO NOT REPLY [Bug 15435] - New Preferences Architecture
Date Fri, 19 Sep 2003 12:42:26 GMT
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG 
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15435>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND 
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.

http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15435

New Preferences Architecture





------- Additional Comments From rolweber@de.ibm.com  2003-09-19 12:42 -------
Hello Mike,

> Is there even a case to share the same instance of a params object between
> multiple methods/clients?  If not, perhaps the constructor should always
> make copies.

I intend to create params objects from my servlets's configuration, and
to use them to create all methods affected by that configuration. The idea
of having a constructor that accepts a params object was to avoid creating
default params that get replaced immediately afterwards. Copying params
in the constructor would leave me without a chance to avoid additional
object creation, even though the one I pass in is exactly the one I want
to be used by the method.

> I would suggest a copy constructor along with/instead of Cloneable as
> cloning can be a little ugly.

Good point. I support "along with". Cloning has the advantage that you
do not need to know the exact class of the object you're dealing with.

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


Mime
View raw message