On Wednesday, May 15, 2002, at 10:04 PM, Ceki G�lc� wrote: <snip>
> We almost certainly do not need BeanPropertySetterRule in any case its a > variant of SetPropertyRule. As for SetTopRule, SetRootRule, SetNextRule, > CallMethodRule, although very generic, imho they make it harder to follow > and understand rule sets. I always try to avoid using them. > > Does my claim about not needing beanutils in log4j make more sense now? yes i think so. you plan to use only the digester engine and then create your own custom rules. these custom rules are going to use internal log4j introspection code (where needed) and therefore won't require beanutils. you're not bothered about not supporting the most popular digester rules since you'd expect people to creating their own custom rules. is this a fair summary? have you thought about what you're going to do about patten matching rules? on a different track, i suppose the one advantage of using a completely rewritten digester is that you can use those improved names with fear of breaking backwards compatibility. - robert -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
