> From: Leo Sutic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > +1 for ComponentLocator, as it gives pleasant J2EE associations > to the "Service Locator" pattern: > >http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/J2EE/patterns / >J2EEPatternsRelationships.html > >I would be +1 for ServiceLocator, but we are talking Components and >not Services.
I checked out the ServiceLocator pages, and I had to chuckle to myself. It looked like Sun was saying "Oops, it's too hard to use J2EE" and solving the problem with yet another layer of complexity. Interesting how adding layers of complexity without fixing the underlying architectural problem adds to layers of software silt. Eventually the average J2EE application will have so much duplicated code (across projects as Sun doesn't include the ServiceLocator in the default J2EE libs) and layers that noone will understand what is going on under the hood. The average wieght for J2EE applications will end up being something like a 70 MB .ear file if they continue down this veign.... That said, I would not be averse to using ServiceLocator. It is used to find Components (EJBs) so there is no stretching the analogy here. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
