You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by bu...@apache.org on 2005/10/30 04:39:09 UTC
DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35882] -
[jxpath] Suggested BeanPropertyFactory implementation
DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG�
RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT
<http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35882>.
ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND�
INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35882
dmitri@plotnix.com changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution| |LATER
------- Additional Comments From dmitri@plotnix.com 2005-10-30 04:39 -------
I like the idea of introducing a default abstract factory. The code provided
by Ken is very useful, but there are some issues that IMO make including it in
the JXPath distribution a little premature.
1. JXPath does not currently require JDK 1.5. Do we want to introduce that
dependency at this point?
2. The factory does not handle either collections or indexed properties.
3. I believe this factory will sometimes generate NullPointerException.
4. I think if we were to bundle an implementation of AbstractFactory with
JXPath, it should handle all supported object models, including DOM, JDOM,
DynaBeans, maps etc.
To summarize, I think we should let this one simmer till we have a more
comprehensive implementation.
--
Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org