[Engine-devel] ovirtSDK: ObjectsFactory would bring ability to customize objects

[Itamar Heim]

On 02/14/2012 06:01 PM, Jaroslav Henner wrote:
> On Tue 14 Feb 2012 03:58:05 PM CET, Itamar Heim wrote:
>> On 02/14/2012 02:57 PM, Jaroslav Henner wrote:
>>> Greetings.
>>>
>>> I'm an automation tester in charge of testing SDK, my problem is that I
>>> cannot influence the objects that are created without so called "monkey
>>> patching" (google that and you will see what it means) the
>>> ovirtsdk.infrastructure.brokers.*. I made some comments about this
>>> #782891, but I was not so clear there, so I hope this will be better:
>>>
>>>
>>> In [12]: api.datacenters.list()[0]
>>> Out[12]: <ovirtsdk.infrastructure.brokers.DataCenter at 0x1a62890>
>>>
>>> You see that this returns an object that was declared somewhere in SDK.
>>> We have AFAIK no good way to say which object should be created.
>>>
>>> It would be good for us to be able to tell SDK:
>>> "
>>> My dear SDK, every time you are asked, please don't create and give me
>>> ovirtsdk.infrastructure.brokers.DataCenter, but something very similar:
>>> our.tests.infrastructure.brokers.DataCenter
>>> "
>>
>> I'm not sure i understand - you want the SDK to return an object from
>> a class it does not know (i.e., the SDK to return an object from your
>> class)?
>> how will this look like if the SDK was in another language (say java)?
>
> There would be some interface/abstract/concrete class DefaultFactory.
> This will define some common interface. There would be some setter
> inside SDK which would contain the instance of that DefaultFactory. SDK
> user would be able to set it to his own instance of (descendant) of
> DefaultFactory. From this point on, the objects created by SDK would be
> from the newly set factory -- customized.
> [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_factory_pattern]
>

while i understand the benefit this will give you in extending the 
classes, It doesn't sounds to me like the classical sdk, which just 
gives you the API at OO class level?