Re: [MINA 3] Session attributes

2011-12-07 Thread Emmanuel Lécharny
On 12/7/11 2:58 PM, Chad Beaulac wrote: Why not use an enum for all the keys? There is no such thing like a generic Enum type which would be inherited by all Enums. Something like session.addAttribute( Enum, Object ) is not possible. Of course, if we define the addAttribute method as : add

Re: [MINA 3] Session attributes

2011-12-07 Thread Chad Beaulac
Why not use an enum for all the keys? On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: > On 12/5/11 4:32 PM, Christian Schwarz wrote: > >> As a user, having to create a new instance to hold the key and value might >> >>> be seen as heavy, don't you think ? >>> >>> session.set(new Attrib

Re: [MINA 3] Session attributes

2011-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Lécharny
On 12/5/11 4:32 PM, Christian Schwarz wrote: As a user, having to create a new instance to hold the key and value might be seen as heavy, don't you think ? session.set(new AttributeKey(String.** class,"myKey"),"myAttribute"); is a bit more complex than session.set( "myKey", "myAttribute" );

Re: [MINA 3] Session attributes

2011-12-05 Thread Christian Schwarz
As a user, having to create a new instance to hold the key and value might > be seen as heavy, don't you think ? > > session.set(new AttributeKey(String.** > class,"myKey"),"myAttribute"); > > is a bit more complex than > > session.set( "myKey", "myAttribute" ); > > Or is it just me ? > It's true

Re: [MINA 3] Session attributes

2011-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Lécharny
On 12/5/11 3:52 PM, Christian Schwarz wrote: What about mixing both mode ? A mode for simple usage, and a typesafe mode, as you suggested (that means we will have two different kind of map to store both elements). I think two modes is one mode to much, it would confuse the user and the typesaf

Re: [MINA 3] Session attributes

2011-12-05 Thread Christian Schwarz
> > What about mixing both mode ? A mode for simple usage, and > a typesafe mode, as you suggested (that means we will have two different > kind of map to store both elements). I think two modes is one mode to much, it would confuse the user and the typesafe aspect would be underminded by the m

Re: [MINA 3] Session attributes

2011-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Lécharny
On 12/5/11 3:32 PM, Christian Schwarz wrote: Hi, I would suggest that we don't use the AttributeKey class at all, and instead, define each internal MINA Attribute by prefixing them with '__'. For instance, the SslContext would use the '__SslContext' key. The rational is that there is no reaon

Re: [MINA 3] Session attributes

2011-12-05 Thread Christian Schwarz
Hi, I would suggest that we don't use the AttributeKey class at all, and > instead, define each internal MINA Attribute by prefixing them with '__'. > For instance, the SslContext would use the '__SslContext' key. The rational > is that there is no reaon to use complex key, even if we have some >

[MINA 3] Session attributes

2011-12-05 Thread Emmanuel Lecharny
Hi, in MINA 2, session's attributes were stored using the AttributeKey class, which was concatenating a class name and a name : private static final AttributeKey PROCESSOR = new AttributeKey( SimpleIoProcessorPool.class, "processor"); ... IoProcessor processor = (IoProcessor) se