You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@avalon.apache.org by Paul Hammant <Pa...@yahoo.com> on 2001/11/06 15:39:34 UTC
Mutually dependant blocks
Peter,
Should a situation where block A depends on block B and vice versa be OK?
At the moment (Jesktop) I am coding this with a Callback, but I don't
think that's right.
- Paul H
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Mutually dependant blocks
Posted by Stefano Mazzocchi <st...@apache.org>.
Paul Hammant wrote:
>
> Peter,
>
> Should a situation where block A depends on block B and vice versa be OK?
I would say no.
> At the moment (Jesktop) I am coding this with a Callback, but I don't
> think that's right.
Same here. This calls for refactoring.
--
Stefano Mazzocchi One must still have chaos in oneself to be
able to give birth to a dancing star.
<st...@apache.org> Friedrich Nietzsche
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Mutually dependant blocks
Posted by Paul Hammant <Pa...@yahoo.com>.
>
>
>>Should a situation where block A depends on block B and vice versa be OK?
>>
>
>nope because a dependency tree could not be built. It should throw a failed
>validation exception if it detects this.
>
Darn.
>>At the moment (Jesktop) I am coding this with a Callback, but I don't
>>think that's right.
>>
>
>Seems fine to me ;) Whats the particular case.
>
Kernel needs WindowManager and v.v.
The latter has a method setDesktopKernel(..)
- Paul
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: Mutually dependant blocks
Posted by Peter Donald <do...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 7 Nov 2001 01:39, Paul Hammant wrote:
> Peter,
>
> Should a situation where block A depends on block B and vice versa be OK?
nope because a dependency tree could not be built. It should throw a failed
validation exception if it detects this.
> At the moment (Jesktop) I am coding this with a Callback, but I don't
> think that's right.
Seems fine to me ;) Whats the particular case.
--
Cheers,
Pete
---------------------------------------------------
"It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we
cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our
responsibilities." -Josiah Stamp
---------------------------------------------------
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>