I agree with you that a `Manageable` Interface, which contains a pair start/destroy would be cleaner. I did not add the start method because there is the Initilizable Interface. As you said very precisily my service is an event service (I did not see that so clearly before), but the Initilizable is not. The Initilizable is managed by the framework, does not need user interaction, is called during runtime and the Service Interface does not have to implement it. If the methods would be paired up some (rather small) changes to the framework had to be done.
Resulting from the event-way I think the biggest disadvantage of my aproach is that the destroy method will be always called wheter the Service has ever been used or not. While this has the little advantage that it is possible to implement special shut-down Servies, but generally it is unneeded (very) resource intensive. The only way I see this could be changed would be if the ServiceExtensionPoint had a method isLoaded() (but this is of course again a framework chance which increses the interfaces size).
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003 10:10:30 +0200, Johan Lindquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Definately interested in a service such as you describe - life-cycle events has been chucked around in the group for a bit and I think it would be a valueable service.
Any chans of changing it [the interface] to (perhaps) 'Manageable' to allow for future 'start' events too or would it be too much to put it all into one interface?
Regards,
Johan
On Sun, 28 Sep 2003 23:46:14 +0200, Christian Essl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I've written a Service which registers Destroyable Services (a special interface which must be implemented by the service-interace) and keeps dependencies between Services. When the application using a Registry shut-downs (and no other thread is using the Registry anymore) it calls on the Service destroy() and the Service will call the destroy() methods on all the registered Services in the right order.
This helps me in my project to easier maintain the right shut-down for Services which need information about ie when they should release resources.
Currently the dependencies and registration of the Services happens through contributions. However when Howard makes it possible to get the Shema and I can implement a ConfigurationBeanFactory I think of implementing a special rule and transformer which automaticly registers a dependend/destryable object when the user creates one or gives it to aother service. This would free the user of a service-implementation of filling in the dependency-contribution, which is of course error-prone.
Is there any intrest in such a Service to be included in HiveMind?
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
