Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #18572
| 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> |
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 | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll 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