On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:02 PM, Alex Karasulu <akaras...@apache.org> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 4:50 PM, Emmanuel Lecharny <elecha...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> we have had some convo about the Dn methods last night. Here are some of the >> things we discussed and came with : >> >> o the getPrefix(N)/getSuffix(N) are cumbersome, and not easy to manipulate. >> The main issue is that they depend on the RDN order, which is the opposite >> as what people are used to manipulate. Everytime you have to get a prefix >> from a Dn, you always wonder what the position should be, and if it's 0 >> based or 1 based... >> >> We propose to replace those methods by getParent(Dn) and getDescendant(Dn). >> Let me give you an example : >> >> // A DN >> Dn dn = new Dn( "cn=test,ou=server,ou=directory,dc=apache,dc=org" ); >> >> // Get the right part (equivalent to getprefix( 2 ) ) >> Dn parent = dn.getParent( "cn=test,ou=server,ou=directory" ); // returns >> "dc=apache,dc=org" >> >> // Get the left part (equivalent to getSuffix( 3 )) >> Dn descendant = dn.getDescendant( "ou=directory,dc=apache,dc=org" ); // >> returns "cn=test,ou=server" >> >> o The Add method is a bit annoying to remove, because first, the JNDI Name >> interface has such a method, and people are used to it, second removing it >> means we have to add some more constructors line Dn( Dn, Rdn... ). I agree >> that someone doing something like : >> >> Dn dn = new Dn( "dc=apache,dc=org" ); >> dn.add( "ou=directory" ); >> >> will expect that the dn is now "ou=directory,dc=apache,dc=org", when it's >> unchanged. >> >> This is really troublesome... What about rename it concatenate() ? >> >> Thoughts ? > > Sounds good. But how about this: > > // not showing full Rdn but an index value representing the actual > rdns in the dn for pos clarity > Dn dn = new Dn( “9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0” ); > > dn.getAncestorDn( “9, 8, 7, 6” ); > > => “5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0” > > dn.getAncestorDn( 6 ); > > => “5, 4, 3, 2, 1, 0” > > dn.getDnToAncestor( “1, 0” ); > > => “9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2” > > dn.getDnToAncestor( 2 ); > > => “9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2” > > Dn namingContext = “1, 0”; > > // all same below > Dn dnAfterNamingContext = dn.getDnToAncestor( "1, 0" ); > Dn dnAfterNamingContext = dn.getDnToAncestor( namingContext ); > Dn dnAfterNamingContext = dn.getDnToAncestor( namingContext.size() ); > Dn dnAfterNamingContext = dn.getDnToAncestor( namingContext.toString() ); > > dnAfterNamingContext ===> “9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2” > > Overloads should be provided for Dn, String and int. >
Maybe some convenience methods like: dn.isAncestor( namingContext ); namingContext.isDescendant( dn ); dn.isRelated( namingContext ); => i.e. two DNs in different namingContexts will not be related namingContext.isParent( dn ); dn.isChild( namingContext ); dn.isSibling( namingContext ); Regards, Alex
