[infinispan-dev] Configuration visitor - Re: [JBoss JIRA] Commented: (ISPN-145) No transport and singleton store enabled should not be allowed

[Mircea Markus]

On 23 Sep 2009, at 18:23, Manik Surtani wrote:

> In general though, the problem with the visitor pattern is that it  
> does not work well for situations where you have an arbitrary (and  
> dynamically changing) number of command types.  Visitors worked well  
> for us for invocations since we have a small and finite set of API  
> commands that do not change often.  I think it also works for  
> configuration since again, there are a few high-level "classes" of  
> features encapsulated by a ConfigurationBean impl.  So again, small  
> and finite set, doesn't change often.  So within these constraints,  
> there should be no need for weakly typed method invocations via  
> reflection.  :)
> 
> My personal rule of thumb - if a reflection-based visitor approach is  
> to be considered, then this is a bad application for the visitor  
> pattern.
+1. reflection-based visitor sounds like an oxymoron to me :-)