On 03 Jul 2006, at 15:17, Frederic Daoud wrote:
Do you guys think this is a good solution to the lack of a
predictable order while retrieving methods through reflection?
I've been thinking about this issue for a while now. Personally,
I don't like numbering schemes as a solution to a problem because
Me neither, I hate them actually.
I find them fragile and an indication that something else could be
I tried to work around the fragility by supporting structured
numbering so that you don't have to carefully order them constantly,
but so that you can just identify important groups of annotations.
The position for the first submission would be "1", but for it's
parameters it can be anything like "1.1" or "1.8" or ... This doesn't
really matter since the important part it that the parameters are
grouped with the submission. The second submission will then use "2"
and "2.x" for its parameters.
done to solve the problem. However, in this case, I can't think of
another way. The unpredictability of the order of methods, and the
importance of this order, is the wall I keep hitting.
Exactly, and sadly I can't find something else myself either, without
rewriting the Java core functionalities :-p
So, yes, that could be a good solution, it's simple and should
make it possible to work things out.
--
Geert Bevin
Uwyn "Use what you need" - http://uwyn.com
RIFE Java application framework - http://rifers.org
Music and words - http://gbevin.com
_______________________________________________
Rife-users mailing list
Rife-users@uwyn.com
http://lists.uwyn.com/mailman/listinfo/rife-users
