james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Serge Knystautas <ser...@lokitech.com>
Subject Re: Mailet API was RE: Finer Logging Control for Mailets/Matchers
Date Sun, 09 Jun 2002 02:43:17 GMT
I agree there are performance issues to consider and weigh what someone 
would expect, but I think these API decisions should be driven by 
use-examples (use cases, or whatever modeling techniques you want). 
Most of these discussion on the mailet API seem focused on programming 
styles than *how* this API will be used.
Serge Knystautas
Loki Technologies - Unstoppable Websites

Danny Angus wrote:
>>I'll hope that you have a simple API like :
>>   MailAction mailRequest(MailItem mailItem) throw MailRequestException;
> 's funny you should say that, 'cos I'd like to hear your opinion on this..
> two alternatives;
> a) Mail service(Mail mail) throws MailetException;
> and
> b) void service(Mail mail) throws MailetException;
> the difference being that a returns a Mail which continues through the
> processing, _as__if_ the Mail had been passed by value, and b alters the
> existing message as if it had been passed by refrence (which of course it
> has).
> Now I did a lot of C programming, where the refrence approach was the
> conventional one, but in Java the by-value analogy seems to be the expected
> way.
> the argument in favour of b is that it is more efficient, and actually
> constrains processors to acting in a linear fashion, by not allowing new
> Mails to be returned.
> Alternatively it might be argued (perhaps by me ;-) that a is the more
> expected/acceptable signature and that anyway there is nothing stopping a
> mailet from replacing the value of Mail mail with a new Mail anyway.
> d.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:james-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:james-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>

View raw message