jhunter at servlets.com
Wed Jan 30 15:44:10 PST 2002
> > Reason one:
> > Why should setAttribute(Attribute) be different than
> > setAttribute(String, String)? I personally would think
> > Element.setAttribute(String, String) would be a wrapper around
> > Element.setAttribute(Attribute).
> My intuition is different. There's two less personal reasons to use "my"
> logic. You avoid creating more objects than needed, and you avoid creating
> objects outside a factory. The last is perhaps most important, since the
> main usage of a factory is to control object creation.
> > Reason two:
> > Maybe someone else has a reference to the original Attribute and
> > changing that object's state indirectly (by a call to its parent) is not
> > desirable if it can be avoided.
> We'll, he who brought up the question had the opposite problem: That of
> keeping the Attribute reference. I would guess that is just as relevant a
Like I said originally, "One could argue it shouldn't, and one can argue
it should." :-) You can easily achieve both behaviors, so all we're
talking about is default behavior. I don't really care between the two,
although I lean toward having all the Element setAttribute() methods
have the same behavior, which is what we have now.
> BTW, do we have a poll mechanism for helping to decide such things?
Classic open source. Those doing the largest amounts of work get to
decide, since they're the lifeblood of the project.
More information about the jdom-interest