On 09/09/2012 19:50, Mark Thomas wrote: > This is part of issue b) in Konstantin's comments in TOMCAT-NEXT.txt > > Konstantin has accurately summed up the issues with basing the API on > DirContext as: > - Unnecessary objects, e.g. NamingException instead of null. > > - Too many methods. Name vs. String. list() vs. listBindings(). > > - Limited API. As a workaround, there are non-standard methods that > are implemented on BaseDirContext instead, e.g. getRealPath(), > doListBindings(..). > > I do not believe that the resources implementation should be based > around DirContext. It adds a lot of unnecessary clutter and complexity > to something that is already fairly complex. A comparison of the > DirContext based implementation objects with the new implementation > demonstrates - in my view - how much simpler this could be.
This is the next issue I'd like to resolve. Does anyone have any views one way or the other as to whether or not any refactoring of the Resources implementation should continue to be based around the JNDI DirContext interface? My own view remains that DirContext adds complexity and clutter to code that needs simplicity and clarity. Mark --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
