shale-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Rahul Akolkar" <rahul.akol...@gmail.com>
Subject [dialog2] "Advance" failures and names
Date Wed, 30 Aug 2006 20:38:15 GMT
Some notes from looking at the dialog2 sandbox modules:

a) Dealing with failures in:

Context#advance(FacesContext, String)

It is possible that advancing a dialog might fail (say there is no
such state defined as indicated by a transition target), and while
many of these errors can be caught by static analysis and model
checking tooling (indeed, Commons SCXML, for example will warn of many
such errors at parsing time), how should the engine that gets plugged
in report such an error, if one at all occurs? Doesn't make much sense
to have a typed exception here since its going to bubble up to the
handleNavigation() method without a throws clause.

NIT-PICKS (yes, I'm aware I'm nit-picking below ;-):

b) In line with FacesContext, InitialContext, PageContext etc., should
we rename the Context interface to DialogContext? Context seems way
too generic and would make the variable declarations more readable,
IMO. Also appropriate for me to point out that there is a Context
interface in Commons SCXML but there was lot of time spent mulling
over that name FWIW now.

c) Based on my own preference of code readability, I've left SCXML in
upper case in classnames in Commons SCXML (so, SCXMLExecutor,
SCXMLDigester etc.). If anyone cares about the "synergy" in naming
between the Shale module and the library, perhaps someone can rename
ScxmlContext and ScxmlContexts to match that style?

-Rahul

Mime
View raw message