[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-116?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13052489#comment-13052489
]
Stefano Bagnara commented on MIME4J-116:
----------------------------------------
I was not thinking about stateful MutableBodyDescriptor. Instead I was thinking
about allowing MutableBodyDescriptor.addField to return a replacement Field for
the RawField received in input. If the return value is non null then the caller
can use it instead of the original.
The fact is that the MutableBodyDescriptors already have parsing logic (in fact
field parsing is their main job right now) and they are the place where further
parsing should happen: maybe the problem is the name of this "interface" but I
think that it would not be an hack (for sure not ugly) to have that object to
deal with all parsing logic.
MutableBodyDescriptor could already be an user of the parsed fields, but if the
parsing logic is *optional* and happen *previously* then it will anyway have to
check if the field has been parsed or parse it again. Also, if we move it to
the BodyDescriptor it will allow to run the parse only for the field you care
during the parsing and not for every field defined in the FieldParser (yes, we
can replace them with lazy parsedfields, but this way we could even avoid this
step).
WDYT? I'm still playing with the code, so maybe I missed some important thing,
but if you don't think this is an option maybe I should stop playing with this
and look elsewhere.
> Avoid duplicate parsing of header fields
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: MIME4J-116
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MIME4J-116
> Project: JAMES Mime4j
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Affects Versions: 0.6
> Reporter: Markus Wiederkehr
> Fix For: 0.7
>
>
> Currently some header fields are parsed twice when building a DOM. Once by
> DefaultBodyDescriptor or MaximalBodyDescriptor and a second time by
> MessageBuilder using Field.parse().
> Also different parsers are used in both stages. The body descriptors use
> handcrafted parsers whereas Field.parse uses JavaCC generated parsers. The
> handcrafted version does not seem to handle comments in a header correctly.
> The situation should be improved by parsing a header field only once and
> passing that already parsed field to a content handler. Also only one sort of
> field parser should be used; either handcrafted or generated. My personal
> opinion is that it might be easier for a handcrafted parser to be more
> tolerant against malformed header fields.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
