im sure there will be one in a near future. -igor
On 5/10/07, Bruno Borges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
There's no removeValidator(), right? So, we dont have to care about behaviors added by validators. -- Bruno Borges Summa Technologies Inc. www.summa-tech.com (48) 8404-1300 (11) 3055-2060 On 5/10/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 5/10/07, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > i find that class extremely ugly > > IValidator is a pretty simple interface but IBehavior not. > > > > And what does that solve? nothing i don't find it any cleaner > > > can you remove behaviors that validator has added? when your remove a > validator how will you know which behaviors were linked? > > And you have to add it twice.. or only as a valdiator and we add it also > as > > a validator?? > > > no. if ivalidator implements ibehavior we only add it to behaviors. then > validate also iterates over behaviors and does instanceof ivalidator. > > (then you have to do that funny cast) > > > yes. this is the only con i see. like i said maybe we add a convineience > addvalidator(ivalidator) that will avoid the cast. > > -igor > > > > johan > > > > > > > > On 5/10/07, Igor Vaynberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On 5/10/07, Johan Compagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > and i don't like that > > > > that is mixing 2 classes as once thing > > > > that means no reuse what so ever. This just makes big copy paste > > > actions. > > > > > > > > > lets see a concrete example of this. i dont see how my > > > ValidatorWithBehavior > > > thing prevents any reuse. > > > > > > -igor > > > > > >
