sebb <seb...@gmail.com> schrieb am Do., 30. Juni 2016 um 13:16 Uhr:
> On 30 June 2016 at 11:01, Stian Soiland-Reyes <st...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On 30 June 2016 at 00:53, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> As the subject says; the two factories use a different naming
> convention.
> >>
> >> Would it be sensible to standardise on getInstance, given that the
> >> class name says what the instance will be?
> >
> > Hm, but CryptoRandomFactory.getCryptoRandom() returns a CryptoRandom,
> > and CryptoCipherFactory.getInstance() returns a CryptoCipher() (not a
> > CryptoCipherFactory).
> >
> > I think it would be misleading to call it getInstance() as that
> > implies the singleton pattern, e.g. to return the *Factory, but in
> > fact neither of the factories can be instantiated (private
> > constructor, only static methods).
>
> getInstance() does not imply Singleton to me, for example:
>
> Calendar.getInstance()
> TimeZone.getInstance()
>
Those APIs are just bad IMHO. We shouldn't use them as an example :-)
>
> > Both methods take parameters, so it would be returning different
> > instances depending on the parameters - so although the ciphers etc.
> > might always be the same instances, it's not the singleton pattern.
> > (But then not quite the factory pattern either :) )
> >
> >
> > Agreed that the two factories should however be consistent, so I would
> suggest:
> >
> >
> > public class CryptoRandomFactory {
> > public static CryptoRandom getCryptoRandom( .. ) { .. }
> > }
> >
> > public class CryptoCipherFactory {
> > public static CryptoCipher getCryptoCipher( ..) { .. }
> > }
>
> That actually results in the fewest changes to the source currently.
>
> It would also allow the following usage:
>
> import static
> org.apache.commons.crypto.random.CryptoRandomFactory.getCryptoRandom;
> ...
> CryptoRandom random = getCryptoRandom(properties);
>
> >
> > But I understand your argument.. because for the caller it will be
> > quite repetitive:
> >
> > CryptoCipher cryptoCipher = CryptoCipherFactory.getCryptoCipher( .. ) ;
> > CryptoRandom cryptoRandom = CryptoRandomFactory.getCryptoRandom( .. ) ;
> >
> >
> > Perhaps just call the methods just .get(...) instead?
> >
> >
> > public class CryptoRandomFactory {
> > public static CryptoRandom get( .. ) { .. }
> > }
> >
> > public class CryptoCipherFactory {
> > public static CryptoCipher get( ..) { .. }
> > }
> >
>
> Cannot then use static import of both.
>
> >
> > --
> > Stian Soiland-Reyes
> > Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
> > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>
