On Thursday, May 16, 2002, at 09:12 PM, Ceki G�lc� wrote: > At 20:28 16.05.2002 +0100, you wrote:
<snip> >> you're not bothered about not supporting the most popular digester rules >> since you'd expect people to creating their own custom rules. > > Yes. I find it much quicker and safer to write a new Action > (o.a.c.digester.Rule) in just a few lines of java than writing multiple > pattern/rule pairs using the standard rules but that's just me. i sometimes feel the same. i like using anonymous classes. where the existing rules come into there own is with complex xml mappings. they allow more concise rules sets for large mappings. when you've got dozen's of classes and elements to map, smaller, more powerful rulesets start to come into their own. but since in this context we're dealing with configuration and therefore smaller mappings, it makes a lot more sense to push users into creating new rules. complex rulesets using the generic rules are very powerful but also rather arcane and pretty hard to debug. you're probably going to save a lot of grief in the long run by persuading people to adopt your approach. <snip> >> have you thought about what you're going to do about patten matching >> rules? > > Yes, I have given it some thought. Although the hierarchical rules > extension of the digester model is cool (hey it's my idea), I am trying > to find ways of sticking to the original digester model and not > introducing hierarchical Rules (i.e. o.a.c.digester.Rules). I'll be sure > to look at betwixt and xo. Thanks for the pointers by the way. i think that maybe we are a bit at cross purposes here. (though your comments were interesting.) i was talking about the 'Rules' architecture. these are more correctly pattern matching rules. 'Rules' implementations are used to return a list of rule's that match a given element pattern. i'm a bit confused by what you mean by hierarchical rules. do you mean that self-configuring extension that you proposed earlier? (the more i have to talk about digester to you, the more i think that the digester nomenclature is holding the component back.) - robert -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
