[ http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELTOOLS-62?page=comments#action_12435358 ] Nathan Bubna commented on VELTOOLS-62: --------------------------------------
Interesting. And yeah, this would be useful. But i've never been a fan of marker interfaces, and in 1.3, i'm actually trying to ditch interfaces in favor of looking for a relevant method in reflection. perhaps we could trade these interfaces for something like a "public Set getValidScopes()" method. the toolbox manager would check for such a method. if it existed, then we just do getValidScopes().contains(sti.getScope()) when validating the ToolInfo. this would be more inline with the direction 1.3 is going. what do you think? of course, long term, i see something like this being done via annotation. > New empty interfaces that allow one to enforce the scope of a tool > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: VELTOOLS-62 > URL: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELTOOLS-62 > Project: VelocityTools > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: Claude Brisson > Priority: Minor > Attachments: ApplicationTool.java, RequestTool.java, > ServletToolboxManager.patch, SessionTool.java > > > This is a proposal. Once that a tool implements at least one of the three > interfaces RequestTool, SessionTool or ApplicationTool, it means that the > actual scope of the tool must correspond to one of the interfaces the tool is > implementing. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/Administrators.jspa - For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
