Re: abstract static methods (again)
On Mon, 19 Oct 2009, Eric Sosman wrote:
Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
On second thought: If the Entertainers were designed to be dynamically
loaded by name, then Comedians just wouldn't have any chance of a
individual default joke. They could offer their Joke- constructor, but
unless they also offered a no-args one, they just wouldn't ever be
successfully engaged.
But I admit that my familiarity with frameworks of this kind is
slight. Perhaps they're just not suited for classes whose instances
lack obvious defaults. (Maybe they're only good for singletons?)
They have a mechanism for configuring objects as well as creating them. I
use one which for each object you want to create, there's a property file,
which looks like:
$class=com.sosman.strawman.Comedian
joke=A compiler, a linker, and an editor walk into a bar ...
Which is translated by the reflective machinery into calls like:
Class cl = Class.forName("com.sosman.strawman.Comedian");
Object obj = cl.newInstance();
cl.getMethod("setJoke", String.class).invoke(obj, "A compiler, a linker, and an editor walk into a bar ...");
With some more stuff to deal with properties that aren't strings. It's not
pretty, but it quite often works.
It might be better if the framework tried to find a constructor which
would take the specified parameters, but it's not obvious how you'd do
that. However, i don't see how Tomas's proposal would help.
tom
--
Civis Britannicus sum.