> >> DynamicMbeanFactory will throw exceptions when there is > get/is/set methods > >> that don't conform to JavaBeans standard where I think it should just > >> ignore them (Leo can you confirm that???). > > > >No (sorry). According to the specification, an object that us not a valid > >JavaBeam/MBean will not be exposed. have no problem with going against > >that spec...it'd mean we could never claim actual JMX compliance though. > > We are compliant with JavaBeans (they say ignore anything that doesn't fit > pattern) > however your implementation assumes that if they start with get > they MUST bet a getter (which is not true in our case). Same with > is and set. I fixed that, didn't I? whoops...old copy in the CVS...ouch. Got it covered...I'm actually now using the same array and filtering out javabeans methods. Whatever is left gets to be an operation. I'll commit soon. I'm still thinking about the exact impl. It kinda makes sense to use java.beans.Introspector. More to follow... > >I've typed three replies to that question before I got what you ment. > >having a > > > >DynamicMBeanFactory.create( Object object, Class clazz ) > > or preferrably > > DynamicMBeanFactory.create( Object object, Class[] interfaces ) ahh. Really tired right now... ;) > I am -1 on anything directly implementing ClassDescriptor (violation of > IOC) however I don't mind if they sit side by side. So you could pass in > descriptor when creating proxy. After more thought, I am as well. Figured out a recursive function that will do the other one quite nicely...I think. > But remember that Blocks implement Service (and thus ManagedService) so > they automagically inherit manageable facet. And if we implement above > method (ie pass in Class objects) the CLass objects will all be interfaces > and thus no need to have Block implement Managable or anything like that. yupyup. > >I hope to have time for these changes this weekend... addendum: that might be tomorrow...actually thought it was the day after tomorrow today, so that my imaginary tomorrow would be the weekend. This is of course not the case as today is today and that other tomorrow is actually be a few days away which is why I did not say what I ment. (if you followed that on the first run, congrats. You're used to structural programming ;) greetz, LSD --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
