OK. This would confirm that the other constructor is no longer needed,
since the test that passes a result-spec arg in the process method no
longer calls that.
Thanks. -Marshall
Michael Baessler wrote:
When looking at the tests for the capability language flow I see both
tests one with the result spec argument in the process() method and
one without.
In older UIMA versions, when using the debugger I see that both
constructors are used there.
-- Michael
Marshall Schor wrote:
Thanks. I'll see about comparing the older method with the current
method, to verify this. -Marshall
Michael Baessler wrote:
In older UIMA versions the CapabilityLanguageFlowObject(List
aNodeList, ResultSpecification resultSpec) constructor was used
when the result was set by an application using the process method
with the resultSpec argument. In the current version it seems that
only the version with the precomputed FlowTable is used. But I can't
say if that is correct or not since I don't know the details about
the ResultSpec restructuring (maybe only Adam knows). But you are
right, if this constructor isn't necessary both, the code and the
constructor, can be removed.
Seems that the architecture has changed here. :-)
-- Michael
Marshall Schor wrote:
If this is removed or if it is never called, then there is a
section of the logic in CapabilityLanguageFlowObject which is never
used, because mNodeList == null:
if (mNodeList != null) {
// 80 or lines of code elided
}
Can this logic be removed?
-Marshall
Marshall Schor wrote:
The class CapabilityLanguageFlowObject has 2 defined constructors,
but one is never used/referenced:
CapabilityLanguageFlowObject(List aNodeList, ResultSpecification
resultSpec)
Can this be removed?
-Marshall
