On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 12:23 PM, Bob Tarling <[email protected]> wrote:
> Maybe not relevant to this specific proposal but a comment on what I
> see of how notations are defined.
Not really part of the same thread, so I've changed the subject.
>
> NotationProviderFactory2 npf = NotationProviderFactory2.getInstance();
> NotationName nn = Notation.findNotation("UML 1.4");
> npf.addNotationProvider(NotationProviderFactory2.TYPE_SD_MESSAGE,
> nn, SDMessageNotationUml.class);
>
>
> The use of SDMessageNotationUml.class here makes me assume that at
> some later point an instance of SDMessageNotationUml is created by
> reflection.
That looks a little unorthodox, but I don't see that it necessarily
implies that reflection is being used. If it was written as
> npf.addNotationProvider(NotationProviderFactory2.TYPE_SD_MESSAGE,
> nn, "SDMessageNotationUml");
I'd be unhappy because you'd have to look for text strings, but as it
is currently the token SDMessageNotationUml.class is checked by the
compiler and if I ask the IDE for all places that SDMessageNotationUml
is used, it will have no problem finding this.
> I find reflection tends to hide the true relationships between classes.
Usually true, but do we know that reflection is being used here?
Tom
------------------------------------------------------
http://argouml.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=450&dsMessageId=986885
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail:
[[email protected]].
