On 4/30/05, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 6:01 AM -0700 4/30/05, rmanchu wrote: > >Joe Germuska wrote: > > > >> > >>I'm happy to see this general pattern extended to any config > >>element. The cost is pretty low, and in fact, consistency would be > >>nice -- users shouldn't have to worry about where they can use the > >>"key" attribute in <set-property>. Probably we should add some > >>interface to cleanly represent the nature of > >>"HavingArbitraryProperties"... although a good name is eluding me > >>at the moment. > > > >hmmm for now, just add the get/set methods? as in action mapping? :) > > No, i think an interface is called for
Agreed. > -- when you get into the code, > you'll see an inner class of ConfigRuleSet, > "ActionConfigSetPropertyRule" -- you don't want to make a new one of > these for each case, and you don't want to have to cast to a number > of different types, so it's just a matter of coming up with a decent > name. It doesn't have to be a beautiful name, as it's a fairly > internal concept, but the net result should be having each config > object implement this interface (which would basically just be > "setProperty(key,value)"). I suppose it might be worth including > "String getProperty(key)" in the interface too. > > Perhaps "PropertiedConfig"? PropertyMap? ConfigProperties? -- Martin Cooper > and then changing the ActionConfigSetPropertyRule to > PropertiedConfigSetPropertyRule. > > >ps: will log n upload a patch (hopefully) soon. > > wonderful -- thanks! > > Joe > > -- > Joe Germuska > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://blog.germuska.com > "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
