Hi Sven
with igor we went over the start up list and we saw that ZnServer resgiter all subclasses of ZnServer. We think that it would be better to have a list of servers to be registered and that users can decide. What do you think? Stef |
Stef,
On 20 May 2011, at 08:57, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > Hi Sven > > with igor we went over the start up list and we saw that ZnServer resgiter all subclasses of ZnServer. > We think that it would be better to have a list of servers to be registered and that users can decide. > What do you think? > > Stef It is the traditional/classic idea that a server object in Smalltalk should survive image save/load. This is very convenient for beginners and during development. For production systems, explicit control is better. Now that I look at the code again, I must agree that it is a bit weird: only those server registered/started as the default in their class fall under this scheme, not other instances. So yes, an explicit managed list of ZnServer subclasses that need startup/shutdown would be nicer. If that is what you mean. Sven |
On 20 May 2011 10:08, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Stef, > > On 20 May 2011, at 08:57, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> Hi Sven >> >> with igor we went over the start up list and we saw that ZnServer resgiter all subclasses of ZnServer. >> We think that it would be better to have a list of servers to be registered and that users can decide. >> What do you think? >> >> Stef > > It is the traditional/classic idea that a server object in Smalltalk should survive image save/load. This is very convenient for beginners and during development. For production systems, explicit control is better. > > Now that I look at the code again, I must agree that it is a bit weird: only those server registered/started as the default in their class fall under this scheme, not other instances. > > So yes, an explicit managed list of ZnServer subclasses that need startup/shutdown would be nicer. If that is what you mean. > Because Default means only single server. While actually there could be as many servers as you want. So, during image startup, there should be a registration mechanism, which registers servers and starting them up. Instead of 'Default' single instance. > Sven > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. |
Igor,
On 20 May 2011, at 10:32, Igor Stasenko wrote: > So, during image startup, there should be a registration mechanism, > which registers servers and starting them up. > Instead of 'Default' single instance. Currently, all ZnServers understand #start and #stop (which could be renamed or aliased to #startUp and #shutDown). And there is a system wide startup list whose objects receive #startUp and #shutDown when needed. (I believe there is also this boolean saying if it is just an image save or a real quit, no ?) So there are 2 possibilities: 1. Zn manages its own list and registers its manager for that just once 2. each Zn server instance registers itself directly (less work for me, more reuse) Sven |
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe
On May 20, 2011, at 10:08 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: > Stef, > > On 20 May 2011, at 08:57, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> Hi Sven >> >> with igor we went over the start up list and we saw that ZnServer resgiter all subclasses of ZnServer. >> We think that it would be better to have a list of servers to be registered and that users can decide. >> What do you think? >> >> Stef > > It is the traditional/classic idea that a server object in Smalltalk should survive image save/load. This is very convenient for beginners and during development. For production systems, explicit control is better. > > Now that I look at the code again, I must agree that it is a bit weird: only those server registered/started as the default in their class fall under this scheme, not other instances. > > So yes, an explicit managed list of ZnServer subclasses that need startup/shutdown would be nicer. If that is what you mean. Yes :) > > Sven > > |
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe
I had the impression that 1 is better more self contained.
>> So, during image startup, there should be a registration mechanism, >> which registers servers and starting them up. >> Instead of 'Default' single instance. > > Currently, all ZnServers understand #start and #stop (which could be renamed or aliased to #startUp and #shutDown). > > And there is a system wide startup list whose objects receive #startUp and #shutDown when needed. (I believe there is also this boolean saying if it is just an image save or a real quit, no ?) > > So there are 2 possibilities: > > 1. Zn manages its own list and registers its manager for that just once > > 2. each Zn server instance registers itself directly (less work for me, more reuse) > > Sven > > |
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe
On 20 May 2011, at 10:46, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: > 1. Zn manages its own list and registers its manager for that just once See http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4428 |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |