Unico Hommes wrote:
>
> I haven't had doubts that hosting nodes as components in an IoC
> container is a good approach, I think it makes perfect sense in light of
> a sitemap's inheritable nature. What I *have* been having doubts about
> is the way the container is now being configured from a sitemap
> following a transformation to a general container configuration, but
> that may be another story alltogether.
>
> I think that defining a separate lifecycle extension for nodes in
> combination with a semantic restriction on sitemap components that says
> they must not implement Node will work well.
>
> For instance, we could define:
>
> interface Node {
> /** creation time LFE */
> setup(Context context, ServiceManager manager);
> }
>
> where context and manager parameters contain private objects that are
> not available to their equivalents passed in through contextualize and
> service respectively.
>
> The LFE should just make sure the component it services is not a sitemap
> component.
>
> Wouldn't that work?
>
Yes, that would work. The only question, how will you check that only nodes
will implement this? We could test against a common interface: Node.
Ok, you have my +1 :)
Carsten
