pivot-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Brown <gkbr...@mac.com>
Subject Re: Constant Interface Antipattern
Date Wed, 21 Apr 2010 22:18:56 GMT
Technically, there's not much difference between ComponentListenerAdapter and ComponentListener.Adapter.
We chose to go with the latter because it more strongly associates the adapter class with
the interface definition and reduces the number of source files to navigate.


On Apr 21, 2010, at 5:53 PM, Alejandro Vilar wrote:

> Yes, I saw this in AWT/Swing but there is already an implementation into a interface.
> To provide default implementations, these implementations could be in separate classes.
Such as, ComponentListenerAdapter or simply Adapter or maybe a AdapterFactory class and use
the import static keyword. What do you think?
>  
> From: Greg Brown [mailto:gkbrown@mac.com] 
> Sent: MiƩrcoles, 21 de Abril de 2010 05:37 p.m.
> To: user@pivot.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Constant Interface Antipattern
>  
> No, the Adapter classes are used to provide default implementations of listener interfaces
so a caller isn't required to implement every method. AWT has similar adapters.
>  
>  
> On Apr 21, 2010, at 5:32 PM, Alejandro Vilar wrote:
> 
> 
> Hi, just an observation but there are many places where this anti-pattern appears, for
example ComponentListener.Adapter, anybody aware of that?
>  
> Refs:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constant_interface
> http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.5.0/docs/guide/language/static-import.html
>  
> Cheers,
> -Alejandro
>  
>  
>  


Mime
View raw message