[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [cdt-dev] [DSF] SessionType
|
At 08:41 PM 7/8/2010, Doug Schaefer wrote:
On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 1:46 PM,
Marc Khouzam <marc.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Vladimir Prus
[
mailto:vladimir@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 12:39 PM
>> To: cdt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: Marc Khouzam
>> Subject: Re: [cdt-dev] [DSF] SessionType
>>
>> I am becoming somewhat concerned :-( You seem to suggest
that
>> overridding a service -- that is, writing my own service
class
>> and doing what I want -- is a sensible approach.
>
> Yes. That's DSF.
And I'll never forget the day we learned about DSF and were told
that.
I was floored. It is not a sensible approach and one of the main
reasons I still don't like DSF (the complex asynchronous programming
model being the other one). If you want DSF to have a higher
adoption
rate, this needs to be addressed.
Why is that so alarming? DSF is more about a framework and a standardized
set of service
interfaces than it is about specific
implementations of those interfaces. If the stock implementations don't
meet your needs then, worst case, you provide your own. This doesn't mean
that the base implementations can't be made flexible to accommodate
different environment and use cases, but at the end of the day, they're
not going to meet everyone's needs.
John
