Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Robert Klemme, post: 4219440"] Thanks for hinting at this detail, Patricia! Performance of this piece of code can vary dramatically with configured class / handler name. That adds a level of complication which might make tracking issues harder ("It was so fast in our lab, now on production it's awfully slow."). Also I find the inconsistency about what needs to be configured irritating: the string can either be a logical name of a handler *or* a class name - and you cannot even distinguish them easily (handler names presented so far are also valid class names). IMHO for this it would be better to have two different properties with clear defined precedence for logical handler name property. That would also make it explicit that there are two mechanisms involved. Even though, I still prefer one of the two uniform approaches (class name, factory class name). Kind regards robert [/QUOTE]