On 17 January 2003, Graham Fawcett said:
> On another note, is there any interest in a composite Publisher design?
> Either implementing a base Publisher and doing session management as a
> mixin rather than a subclass; or implementing a ChainPublisher class
> that could push a request through a succession of other publishers? Just
> my two cents, but it felt it a bit funny to have to use a subclass to
> get session management, it felt like a natural mixin opportunity.

Yes, the Publisher/SessionPublisher division is a bit awkward.  It
works, but I agree that it's not *quite* right to use sub-classing for
that.

> The chain idea has been used in other app servers, I think Sun's Brazil
> server did it that way, and some other that's escaped my memory. (In
> that model, each sub-publisher had a chance to pre-process and
> post-process each request, with the post-processing being done in
> reverse order through the chain. Logging, exception handling, sessions,
> etc. were implemented as post-processing on the up-stream publishers.)
> Bear in mind that I'm very new to Quixote, so perhaps I'm not grokking
> the the Publisher design yet.

Hmmm, neat idea.  Maybe for Quixote 2.0... ;-)

        Greg
--
Greg Ward - software developer                gward@mems-exchange.org
MEMS Exchange                            http://www.mems-exchange.org