[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
RE: [platform-ui-dev] Component framework proposal version 1.0.4 available
|
I looked at 1.0.4 and have a few comments and
questions.
Would this make it easier to create and use reusable
components like a Calendar widget or a Graph control? Would it be possible (or
advisible) to make widgets from Labels and Combo boxes to TableTrees and
StyledText follow the same component model?
One of the major innovations seems to be that a Component
has a constructor that takes some interface parameters, and someone discovers
what those parameters are through reflection and makes sure they are available.
That saves one assignment and cast per parameter but I'm wondering if it's worth
it compared to passing an IAdaptable or a Map or PropertyBag containing all the
needed interfaces.
Are your "Derived Factories" or "Mutable Factories" the
same as "Working Copies" elsewhere in Eclipse?
In section 2.3, why would it be a bad idea to simply pass
the parent composite on to the component rather than creating a new composite or
composite factory? Anyway isn't a CompositeFactory kind of like a Component
itself?
You have a couple
of classes/interfaces, Site and IContainer, that have a dispose() method; was it
your intent that they implement IDisposable? You mention implementing
IDisposable elsewhere.
You note that your adapters are "different from most other
adapters in Eclipse" because they can keep state. Then later you have an
possible optimization for adapters that don't keep state. Can you list any
Eclipse adapters that keep state? Does "not keep state" mean the same as "not
implement IDisposable"?
In the
org.eclipse.core.component.interface extension point does the interface element
need an id? Maybe the interface attribute
should be called
id.
"Service" is still used in a few places where I think you
mean "Component". For example in section 2.4, "when it comes time to create the
service". Also you still use "service interface" in a few
places.
Typo in section 1, "couldcontribute".
