Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #18572

Re: Wormholes

From Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at>
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject Re: Wormholes
Date 2012-09-06 15:10 +0000
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <slrnk4hf7o.u9l.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <9mbhh9-mce.ln1@s.simpson148.btinternet.com> <aapoq4F75iU1@mid.individual.net> <u40lh9-726.ln1@s.simpson148.btinternet.com> <slrnk4grd8.u9l.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <libmh9-9h7.ln1@s.simpson148.btinternet.com>

Show all headers | View raw


Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> wrote:
> The odd part is that the custom box is lost in the structure before a 
> context can be supplied to it, which is the result of caching the 
> structure, and only knowing the context just when recovering the 
> structure from the cache.  That means you either find the custom box to 
> inform it of the context, or you leave the context somewhere the box 
> will look.

I still think, the requirement itself is probably screwed.

Such screwed requirements just happen, and if they happen, then a
screwed implementation may seem like the correct answer - until
something harmless happens, that crashes and burns the screwed
solution and leaves you in the void searching for an alternative
screwed solution that survives at least until next time...

Back to the Box-example: as the Box-framework may not expect the
getContent() call to depend on any outer local context, it might
evaluate it earlier, and just return a cached result on your call.
This of course will crash and burn your approach, as you built on
the unfounded assumption that each Box's getFieldContent() wouldn't
be called beforehand.  If the Box-framework really gave such a promise,
then it had better provide a context parameter already, lest it be
screwed itself.

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Wormholes Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-09-03 18:12 -0700
  Re: Wormholes eric@invalid.com (EricF) - 2012-09-04 02:06 +0000
    Re: Wormholes Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-09-04 10:08 -0700
    Re: Wormholes Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2012-09-09 13:55 +0200
  Re: Wormholes Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-09-03 22:34 -0400
    Re: Wormholes Stuart <DerTopper@web.de> - 2012-09-04 12:15 +0200
  Re: Wormholes markspace <-@.> - 2012-09-03 21:00 -0700
    Re: Wormholes Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-09-04 07:08 +0200
  Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-04 08:47 +0200
    Re: Wormholes Lew <noone@lewscanon.com> - 2012-09-04 03:10 -0700
      Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-04 16:09 +0200
        Re: Wormholes Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2012-09-04 08:34 -0700
          Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-04 17:46 +0200
            Re: Wormholes Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-09-04 09:31 -0700
        Re: Wormholes Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2012-09-04 11:14 -0700
        Re: Wormholes Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-09-04 19:59 -0400
    Re: Wormholes Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-09-04 13:20 -0700
      Re: Wormholes Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-09-04 20:00 -0400
      Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-05 09:01 +0200
      Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-05 09:02 +0200
      Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-05 09:02 +0200
        Re: Wormholes Zermelo <zermelo@teletu.it.nospam.invalid> - 2012-09-05 09:03 +0200
      Re: Wormholes markspace <-@.> - 2012-09-05 17:34 -0700
  Re: Wormholes Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2012-09-04 14:18 +0100
    Re: Wormholes Robert Klemme <shortcutter@googlemail.com> - 2012-09-05 21:51 +0200
      Re: Wormholes Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2012-09-05 23:26 +0100
        Re: Wormholes Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-09-06 09:32 +0000
          Re: Wormholes Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2012-09-06 11:47 +0100
            Re: Wormholes Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-09-06 15:10 +0000
              Re: Wormholes Steven Simpson <ss@domain.invalid> - 2012-09-06 20:12 +0100
                Re: Wormholes Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2012-09-06 21:08 +0000
  Re: Wormholes Nigel Wade <nmw@ion.le.ac.uk> - 2012-09-04 17:26 +0100
  Re: Wormholes Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-09-04 09:28 -0700
  Re: Wormholes David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2012-09-04 16:54 -0400

csiph-web