Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-hivemind-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 67013 invoked from network); 16 Jun 2005 08:40:49 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 16 Jun 2005 08:40:49 -0000 Received: (qmail 40370 invoked by uid 500); 16 Jun 2005 08:40:48 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-hivemind-user-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 40303 invoked by uid 500); 16 Jun 2005 08:40:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact hivemind-user-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: hivemind-user@jakarta.apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list hivemind-user@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 40290 invoked by uid 99); 16 Jun 2005 08:40:47 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.1 required=10.0 tests=HTML_30_40,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_BY_IP X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (hermes.apache.org: domain of belaran@gmail.com designates 64.233.184.201 as permitted sender) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (HELO wproxy.gmail.com) (64.233.184.201) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.28) with ESMTP; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 01:40:44 -0700 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 71so344743wri for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 01:40:30 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=dZ6o/8pi5jwZFfqyKv+lKQnAgS0nmxx+opJkk/Pwu9SwMConEw4NX/qNPeIMYPmb56RZrsKYp94e1CVO0/9D3LkTZduGbUU/nz8w5BqHVVD3k6nYUm1nYWmedwtr2Dg7j7wav1rbBpRbNY092wtEN3xpkhmlGJAyOHjfsJLwRpg= Received: by 10.54.83.15 with SMTP id g15mr138293wrb; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 01:40:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.50.74 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Jun 2005 01:40:30 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3151c95805061601401ec3408c@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 10:40:30 +0200 From: belaran Reply-To: belaran To: hivemind-user@jakarta.apache.org Subject: Re: Calls to registry.getService() In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_1276_4349436.1118911230628" References: X-Virus-Checked: Checked X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N ------=_Part_1276_4349436.1118911230628 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Glen, IMHO, i agree with Richard, it does seems best practise to "label" the clas= s=20 you're creating an instance.=20 Reusabilit=E9 of the interface is one, important but you could had that hav= ing=20 a very explicit code is generally good practice... ServiceName allow you to= =20 be be very explicit, as the serviceName will generally be more clearer than= =20 the interface name. Belaran 2005/6/16, Hensley, Richard : >=20 > Glen, >=20 > It really depends on whether or not multiple services implementing the=20 > same > interface will be present in your registry. I personally, always specify = a > service name because it seems like I end up reusing an interface with a= =20 > new > implementation or an implementation with a different configuration, eithe= r > of which has a new name. >=20 > Richard >=20 > -----Original Message----- > From: Glen Stampoultzis [mailto:gstamp@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 4:55 PM > To: hivemind-user@jakarta.apache.org > Subject: Calls to registry.getService() >=20 > I'm wondering which is better practice - calling > registry.getService(class) or registry.getService(serviceName, class) > ? >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: hivemind-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: hivemind-user-help@jakarta.apache.org >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: hivemind-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: hivemind-user-help@jakarta.apache.org >=20 >=20 --=20 Belaran, "What'do'ya mean ?" "As a moto, I just avoid meaning anything..." ------=_Part_1276_4349436.1118911230628 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline Glen,

IMHO, i agree with Richard, it does seems best practise to "label"= ; the class you're creating an instance.
Reusabilit=E9 of the interface is one, important but you could had that having a very explicit code is generally good practice... ServiceName allow you to be be very explicit, as the serviceName will generally be more clearer than the interface name.

Belaran

2005/6/16, Hensley, Richard <Richard.Hensley@mckesson.com&= gt;:
Glen,

It really depends on whether or not multiple services implemen= ting the same
interface will be present in your registry. I personally, = always specify a
service name because it seems like I end up reusing an = interface with a new
implementation or an implementation with a different configuration, eit= her
of which has a new name.

Richard

-----Original Message= -----
From: Glen Stampoultzis [mailto: gstamp@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 4:55 PM
To: hivemind-user@jakarta.apach= e.org
Subject: Calls to registry.getService()

I'm wondering w= hich is better practice - calling
registry.getService(class) or registry.getService(serviceName, class)?

----------------------------------------------------------------= -----
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hivemind-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands= , e-mail: hivemind= -user-help@jakarta.apache.org

----------------------------------= -----------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: hivemind-user-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For ad= ditional commands, e-mail: hivemind-user-help@jakarta.apache.org



--
Belaran,
"What'do'ya mean ?"
"As a moto, I= just avoid meaning anything..." ------=_Part_1276_4349436.1118911230628--