You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org> on 2004/11/01 03:16:58 UTC
Re: svn commit: rev 56181 - in cocoon/whiteboard/kernel: . src src/org src/org/apache src/org/apache/cocoon src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/configuration src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/description src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/runtime src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/startup
On 1 Nov 2004, at 02:10, pier@apache.org wrote:
> Author: pier
> Date: Sun Oct 31 18:10:16 2004
> New Revision: 56181
>
> Log:
> Adding new dependancy-injection based Kernel
Just finished writing, please, no comments as of yet... It will MOST
DEFINITELY not work, as it's something put together over a couple of
lazy afternoons while the girlfriend was at some extremely odd
park/garden in South London.
Only thing I want to point out is the number of interfaces in the whole
kernel that blocks _might_ want to use: 1, the Kernel interface which
gets set into blocks willing to do stuff with the kernel internals
itself...
Oh, and, BTW, for now, no logging whatsoever! :-P
Pier
Re: svn commit: rev 56181 - in cocoon/whiteboard/kernel: . src src/org src/org/apache src/org/apache/cocoon src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/configuration src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/description src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/runtime src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/startup
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
On 1 Nov 2004, at 21:42, Ugo Cei wrote:
> Il giorno 01/nov/04, alle 12:16, Pier Fumagalli ha scritto:
>
>> Maybe KernelException should be unchecked, well, done anyway!
>
> Fine. Another small observation, if you don't mind. The name of the
> "Abstract" class is a little vague. Can't we find a better name?
Stefano suggested "Module"... I'll switch it and rewrite a couple of
things he hinted...
Pier
Re: svn commit: rev 56181 - in cocoon/whiteboard/kernel: . src src/org src/org/apache src/org/apache/cocoon src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/configuration src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/description src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/runtime src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/startup
Posted by Ugo Cei <ug...@apache.org>.
Il giorno 01/nov/04, alle 12:16, Pier Fumagalli ha scritto:
> Maybe KernelException should be unchecked, well, done anyway!
Fine. Another small observation, if you don't mind. The name of the
"Abstract" class is a little vague. Can't we find a better name?
Ugo
--
Ugo Cei - http://beblogging.com/
Re: svn commit: rev 56181 - in cocoon/whiteboard/kernel: . src src/org src/org/apache src/org/apache/cocoon src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/configuration src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/description src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/runtime src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/startup
Posted by Pier Fumagalli <pi...@betaversion.org>.
On 1 Nov 2004, at 09:20, Ugo Cei wrote:
> Il giorno 01/nov/04, alle 03:16, Pier Fumagalli ha scritto:
>
>> Just finished writing, please, no comments as of yet... It will MOST
>> DEFINITELY not work, as it's something put together over a couple of
>> lazy afternoons while the girlfriend was at some extremely odd
>> park/garden in South London.
>
> If you didn't want any comments, you shouldn't have committed it ;-)
>
> I did a cursory examination of the code, and without even trying to
> understand how it is supposed to work, I have just one point to make:
> exceptions like ConfigurationException should *really* be unchecked,
> as there is typically no other way to react to a miisconfiguration
> than fail as early as possible. How could you recover from it?
>
> Furthermore, all exceptions should inherit from a common root
> exception class. This simplifies exception handling for clients
> wanting to deal with them, as they are not forced to write a catch
> clause for every possible exception, but can just catch the root one.
ConfigurationException and all the o.a.c.kernel.configuration package
are internal to the kernel implementation itself. They will not be
exposed to blocks. It's a checked extension because the kernel
internals _must_ react to a misconfiguration.
The only exception which could be exposed to the block is
KernelException (another unchecked exception) which gets thrown by the
Kernel interface in the lookup() method. The Kernel interface is the
only one who MIGHT be used by a block when the block wants to have
access to the kernel internals (things like monitors, or weird block
who need to have access to all deployed block instances).
Maybe KernelException should be unchecked, well, done anyway!
Pier
Re: svn commit: rev 56181 - in cocoon/whiteboard/kernel: . src src/org src/org/apache src/org/apache/cocoon src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/configuration src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/description src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/runtime src/org/apache/cocoon/kernel/startup
Posted by Ugo Cei <ug...@apache.org>.
Il giorno 01/nov/04, alle 03:16, Pier Fumagalli ha scritto:
> Just finished writing, please, no comments as of yet... It will MOST
> DEFINITELY not work, as it's something put together over a couple of
> lazy afternoons while the girlfriend was at some extremely odd
> park/garden in South London.
If you didn't want any comments, you shouldn't have committed it ;-)
I did a cursory examination of the code, and without even trying to
understand how it is supposed to work, I have just one point to make:
exceptions like ConfigurationException should *really* be unchecked, as
there is typically no other way to react to a miisconfiguration than
fail as early as possible. How could you recover from it?
Furthermore, all exceptions should inherit from a common root exception
class. This simplifies exception handling for clients wanting to deal
with them, as they are not forced to write a catch clause for every
possible exception, but can just catch the root one.
Ugo
--
Ugo Cei - http://beblogging.com/