Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
> Hi Team,
>
> I am not quiet sure, put I have some strange feelings with the
> changes to the Source interface.
>
> The source interface is now split into Source and ModifiableSource.
> This is a good idea, but I am not sure if it is practicable.
> The original idea behind the refresh() method which builds now the
> ModifiableSource interface, was to refresh and reset the Source object.
> The reason for this is, that there might be Source objects were you
> can only get an InputStream once. So if you want to read more
> than once from a Source object you should call getInputStream(),
> refresh() and then again getInputStream().
> For example, the URLSource (http connection) needs this, as you
> can get only once an inputstream from a connection and calling
> refresh() creates a new connection object.
>
> Now splitting this functionality into a subinterface makes the
> handling of Source objects very difficult: you have first
> to call getInputStream(), test if it is a ModifiableSource, if
> so call refresh() and can then call getInputStream() again.
>
> The SitemapSource (describing a cocoon: url) needs this refresh()
> call, too.
>
> So I would propose to add a new method to the Source interface
> which will make several calls to getInputStream possible.
> Any idea for a name (refresh and recycle are already used)?
What about the getInputStream() method checking to see if it needs
to be refreshed, and handle that automatically. I don't think
altering the interface should be done. I think the implementation
needs to enforce the contract that getInputStream() always returns
a working InputStream().
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
