On 10/4/09 3:31 AM, Mark Miller wrote:
Ted Dunning wrote:
The builder pattern and the config argument to a factory both have the
advantage that you can limit changes after creating an object. Some
things are just bad to change in mid-stream. The config argument is
nice in that you can pass it around to different stake holders, but
the builder can be used a bit like that as well.
Yeah that argument has been made. But I've *never* seen it as an issue.
Just seems like a solution looking for a problem. I can see how it's
cleaner, not missing that point. But still doesn't make me like it much.
Yeah personally this wasn't a problem for me either. I do like the
cleanliness though. Also, I'd very much prefer a config object over
multiple constructors (with the need to deprecate/add with every
change), as I proposed originally in this thread.
I still don't see an advantage of the builder pattern over the config
object + factory pattern - and I'm not even sure if we really need a
factory; IMO passing a config object into a single constructor would be
sufficient for IW.
Michael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
