On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Greg Wilkins <gregw_at_webtide.com> wrote:
> On 24 November 2015 at 02:16, Paul Benedict <pbenedict_at_apache.org> wrote:
>
>> I want to repeat a question I earlier sent:
>> So what is the use case for the getters? Any examples? Because whoever is
>> in charge of constructing of the PushBuilder has already determined and
>> intended what is being pushed. I don't see why a builder needs to be
>> queried for what's just been set.
>>
>
> I don't have any concrete examples, however I can image a framework that
> might pass a pushbuilder to several concerns, each to push their associated
> resources.
>
Greg, it sounds to me like you're hinting at a PushListener. Maybe that
would be a better design than passing around a PushBuilder?
> Obviously it can be usable without getters, but then I see little harm in
> providing them and some use (see below):
>
>> Also, after push(), it is documented that certain values will be cleared
>> -- like path, etag, and lastModified. So I have some questions for the EG
>> to ponder:
>> 1) Should there be a boolean that represents if the builder is "clean"
>> for a new build? A push would clean the builder.
>> 2) Being reusable, should there be a count of how many pushes a builder
>> performs?
>>
>
> Both of these points are rather contrary to your "whoever is in charge
> already knows" meme above:)
>
>
You are right :-) I did allow myself an exception there because these
questions were more about state than the data put in. But point granted.
Cheers,
Paul