[xwiki-devs] [Proposal] Always use Class for ComponentManager.lookup() instead of string
27 Mar
2009
27 Mar
'09
5:20 p.m.
Hi,
Thomas and I would like to propose using a Class to look up components
when using the ComponentManager interface.
Rationale:
* This removes the need for having public static final ROLE fields in
interfaces and prevents duplication with annotation
WDYT?
I'll do it in a few hours, let me know if you don't agree.
Thanks
-Vincent
27 Mar
27 Mar
5:54 p.m.
Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi,
Thomas and I would like to propose using a Class to look up components
when using the ComponentManager interface.
Rationale:
* This removes the need for having public static final ROLE fields in
interfaces and prevents duplication with annotation
WDYT?
I'll do it in a few hours, let me know if you don't agree.
Do you intend to completely remove the lookup-by-string method?
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
5:56 p.m.
On Mar 27, 2009, at 5:54 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote:
Vincent Massol wrote:
yes.
I don't see any use case and we can add it back if we ever require it.
The idea is to have something clean and unambiguous (i.e. only one way
of doing it).
Thanks
-Vincent
Hi,
Thomas and I would like to propose using a Class to look up
components
when using the ComponentManager interface.
Rationale:
* This removes the need for having public static final ROLE fields in
interfaces and prevents duplication with annotation
WDYT?
I'll do it in a few hours, let me know if you don't agree.
Do you intend to completely remove the lookup-by-string method?
6:43 p.m.
Vincent Massol wrote:
Hi,
Thomas and I would like to propose using a Class to look up components
when using the ComponentManager interface.
Rationale:
* This removes the need for having public static final ROLE fields in
interfaces and prevents duplication with annotation
+1
+1 also for removing ROLE members.
--
Sergiu Dumitriu
http://purl.org/net/sergiu/
5705
days inactive
5705
days old
3 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Sergiu Dumitriu -
Vincent Massol