> From: Vjeran Marcinko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter Royal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Avalon framework users" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 1:25 PM
> Subject: Re: Swing Component
>
>
> > On Friday, February 14, 2003, at 12:46 AM, Vjeran Marcinko wrote:
>
> > I would encourage the use of the Proxy objects, because if your code
> > works with them in place then you will be in a better position going
> > forward to migrate (if want/needed) to future containers. I do
realize
> > that there are some cases where the proxies are not desirable, and
thus
> > the ability to disable that feature.
>
> Maybe it would be great to have built-in option to turn off
> proxying if need raises ? Of course, overriding the method in
> a way that you described earlier would work also, it's just
> slightly more complex solution ...
I'm slightly against such an option - I think it is very similar to
the Flexibility Syndrome. I see no need to add an option to the
config whose only purpose is to enable the container to be used
in ways that it explicitely isn't supposed to be used.
I'd put in a
SwingComponent getSwingComponent ()
method in the MyComponent interface and be done with it.
-oOo-
That said, the proxying results in other problems. We moved to
the service.* classes due to the need of putting non-component
objects in the service manager, such as a CORBA ORB.
Since the ORB doesn't have an interface - i.e. there is no
ORB interface, only an ORB class - proxying *will* fail.
This goes for all classes that don't have an interface.
Is this a problem, or am I overreacting?
/LS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
