> From: Stephen McConnell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> Based on the ServiceManager/ServicePool interfaces as presented in 06099,
> I think you would need a higher level abstraction that aggregates the two
> concerns. For example:
>
> interface ServiceResolver extends ServiceManager, ServicePool {}
> interface Resolvable extends Serviceable
> {
> public void resolve( ServiceResolver resolver );
> }
I still have one issue with this: ServicePool uses "checkout" while
ServiceManager
uses "lookup", leading to different code and semantics for
poolable/non-poolable
components.
However, if:
interface ServiceResolver {
Object lookup (String role);
void release (Object service);
}
in order to get the same code/semantics for poolable/non-poolable
components,
then we're back to the old CM interface.
How would you solve this?
/LS
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
