Hi Robert, >From this email, I presume that your implementation of "pass return value of CallMethodRule as parameter to another CallMethodRule" requires another stack?
Can you explain why the new stack is required? Thanks, Simon On Mon, 2003-07-14 at 05:08, robert burrell donkin wrote: > i've been thinking about a user request to use the result of the method > call in a CallMethodRule as a parameter in a subsequent call. most > inter-rule communication in digester is done using stack. a rule instance > pushes something onto a stack which is later popped off by another rule. > > digester already has two stacks (the main one and the params one) together > with accessor methods. but i'd say that adding more stacks like this will > quickly become counterproductive. this strategy also limits the ability of > users to create custom rules which communicate in the right way. > > so, i'm thinking about adding a map of stacks indexed by strings which are > lazily created on demand. this will be exposed by accessor methods which > take a name string in addition to the rest. whenever new rules need to use > a new stack, we add a key constant (probably starting with > "org.apache.commons.digester") and then access the stack through the named > stacks methods. > > comments? > > - robert > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
