On 4/28/11 8:21 PM, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny<elecha...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/28/11 6:28 PM, Stefan Seelmann wrote:
This is not an easy choice.
The problme is that the user might be puzzled to see that a
LdapConnection.search( SearchRequest ) returns a cursor<SearchResponse>
but
that the LdapConnection.search( base, filter, scope, attrs... ) returns a
cursor<Entry>.
Using send( Request ) instead first makes the API lighter (we don't have
to
create one send() method per type of request, it can be hidden in the
LdapConnection class) and it's also for advanced users.
Another idea: We have two interfaces: LdapConnection and
LdapAsyncConnection. What about a third interface (e.g.
AdvancedLdapConnection, need to find a better name) which extends
LdapConnections. Then we can move all the methods for advanced users
to this new interface. Then the LdapConnection interface is much
smaller. We still can have a single LdapNetworkConnection class that
implements all three interfaces.
Thoughts?
Hmmm, that would be shitty... I tried to apply this modification on the
existing code, but sadly, we have two different implementations,
LdapCoreSessionConnection and LdapNetworkConnection. The first implements
LdapConnection, the second one implements LdapAsyncConnection.
Changing this would create a lot of problems...
Maybe we should keep it simple : search( SearchRequest ) returning a
SearchCursor for advanced users, and search( base, filter, scope, attrs...)
returning a Cursor<Entry> for normal users.
wdyt ?
Yes, I agree.
Oops, I forgot to add one bullet to my list of simple modifications :
- I will make all the methods not using a request returning void or
boolean for compare
--
Regards,
Cordialement,
Emmanuel Lécharny
www.iktek.com
