Mailing-List: contact dev-help@river.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@river.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
From: Peter <jini@zeus.net.au>
Reply-To: Peter <jini@zeus.net.au>
To: dev@river.apache.org,
 =?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_K=C5=82eczek?= <michal.kleczek@xpro.biz>
Subject: Re: SerialReflectionFactory - got a better name?
References: <53A80E5B.3070001@zeus.net.au>
	 <1403779983.10777.5.camel@Nokia-N900> <4637382.sT8sVNs8jN@mkleczek-laptop>
	  <5165403.S8r4cIIXlx@mkleczek-laptop>
In-Reply-To: <5165403.S8r4cIIXlx@mkleczek-laptop>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=-MSTZozftZEtivK5OUN5I"
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 00:37:58 +1000
Message-Id: <1403793478.10777.17.camel@Nokia-N900>
Mime-Version: 1.0

--=-MSTZozftZEtivK5OUN5I
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-ID: <1403793475.10777.14.camel@Nokia-N900>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

----- Original message -----
> Also,
> 
> I am not sure I like "Distributed" or "DistributedObject" - it suggests
> an   instance is distributed.

My thoughts at the time were, a Remote object is one with remote state mutated by remote method calls (generalisation), but a distributed object was one with local immutable or thread safe state that could exist at multiple locations, be stored to disk and restored later, even if the original class no longer existed, it was distributed, data, so to speak.  It's original intent was to be a value object, where services and remote objects use distributed objects as return values and parameters, but it has other uses, such as serializing objects without a no arg constructor that don't implement serializable, or allowing inheritance hierarchies to change without breaking deserialization...

> 
> "Transferable"?
> 
> Sorry - English is not my mother tongue so it is hard to find viable 
> alternatives :)

Does it have to be in English?


> 
> Michal
> 
> On Thursday 26 of June 2014 13:23:39 Michał Kłeczek wrote:
> > 1. I understand "Memento" is an interface and "ReflectiveMemento" - an
> > implementation
> > 
> > 2. Isn't just "Memento" too generic?
> > 
> > DistributedObjectMemento?
> > SerializableMemento? (to indicate implementations should support
> > standard serialization)?
> > 
> > 3. A little different issue - did u find a way to serialize cycles in
> > the object graph? Right now SerialReflectionFactory has the same
> > issues as writeReplace()/ readResolve()
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Michal
> > 
> > On Thursday 26 of June 2014 20:53:03 Peter wrote:
> > > Any objections to calling it Momento?
> > > 
> > > ----- Original message -----
> > > 
> > > > You're sharp, so it is, that's a good one.
> > > > 
> > > > ----- Original message -----
> > > > 
> > > > > It really is a Memento. Isn't it?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Michal
> > > > > 
> > > > > 23 cze 2014 13:24 "Peter Firmstone" <jini@zeus.net.au>
> > > > > napisał(a):
> > > > > > Distributed object use SerialReflectionFactory to recreate
> > > > > > themselves
> > > > > > remotely using one of their public constructors, a static
> > > > > > factory method or builder object, however one thing about
> > > > > > SerialReflectionFactory bothers me.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > SerialReflectionFactory is named after it's implementation,
> > > > > > that is, it uses reflection.       At some point in time, we
> > > > > > might decide we want
> > > > > > to use something other than reflection, in that case, the name
> > > > > > would be inappropriate.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > How does DistributedObjectFactory sound?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Has anyone got a better name?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Peter.
> > 
> > --
> 


--=-MSTZozftZEtivK5OUN5I--