Re: [RT] Generalizing the flow

[Christopher Oliver]

Sylvain Wallez wrote:

Christopher Oliver wrote:

Sylvain Wallez wrote:

These somewhat minor changes will allow a greater variety of 
implementations of the Cocoon flow layer. And this is not only for 
the technical beauty of it, as there are a number of good reasons 
why we may want alternate implementations :
- some people (talking about personal experience with some 
customers) don't want to write their controller in JavaScript. They 
want it in Java. Although a continuation-enabled Java is not yet 
available, solutions exist to write this using plain old Java. 


Sorry, but it's already been demonstrated that a Java flow 
implementation is possible without any of these changes.


Yeah, I know this. The Java I'm referring to is neither ATCT nor 
something based on Brakes, but "plain old Java" without any special 
feature.

Sylvain

Then I don't undertand what you're talking about. It is not possible to 
provide a "flow implementation" in the sense that I understand it in 
"plain old Java". But I'm also not interested in pursuing this 
discussion any further. There's a lot of work still to be done on the 
current flow implementation, and what time I have I plan to spend on that..