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: [James-NG] Avalon-free James proposal and reference implementation
Date Wed, 02 Feb 2005 21:34:35 GMT
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>This does look about as anti-IoC as it gets
> 
> Why?  Not that IoC is the be-all and end-all of component design.

Nor do I fully understand and preach design patterns.  To me IoC is 
about not having code know what is using it or how it got instantiated 
or configured.  It knows it depends on object/class X, Y, and Z, and 
something else handled the setting/injecting.

Conversely I would use commons configuration to say, "here mr. object is 
your configuration" and the object would say, "thank you, I will ask 
this configuration object for everything I need to initialize myself."

>>now that I have seen a simple IoC framework in practice, I don't
>>like JNDI and also appreciate what Avalon was trying to do.
> 
> Why?  IoC requires decorators for each thing being pushed, or pushes an
> object providing pull access to the things you want.  Both of those are
> present in Avalon.

I wrote this huge response, then deleted it.  Here's a better way to say 
what I mean:

http://docs.codehaus.org/display/PICO/Inversion+of+Control?decorator=printable

I prefer CDI or Setter injection (Spring does these two), while Avalon 
is Contextualized Lookup.

-- 
Serge Knystautas
Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org


Mime
View raw message