You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@xalan.apache.org by Lionel Villard <vi...@us.ibm.com> on 2003/02/05 22:10:17 UTC
Re: Factory questions
(continue the thread on xalan-dev)
1) => the nodes defined as static never appear in the final AST, so
applications aren't aware of their existence (and consequently can't
customized them)
2) => you're right, KindTest is useless, I'll simplify the code.
3) => right!
Lionel
"Santiago
Pericas-Geertsen" To: Lionel Villard/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
<Santiago.PericasGeerts cc: Shane Curcuru/Cambridge/IBM@Lotus
en@sun.com> Subject: Factory questions
02/05/2003 03:28 PM
Lionel,
I have a few questions about the latest update. I've created my node
factory and started doing all the necessary plumbing and came across the
following issues:
1) Do we intend to give access to the statics defined in impl.parser.Axis
and impl.parser.Singletons? They are now protected, so I can't access them
from my factory.
2) Why is there a KindTest.java in parser and KindTestImpl.java impl?
What's the rationale?
3) The casts in lines 242 and 352 in SimpleNode.java are incorrect, right?
They do not agree with the nodes that are created by default.
-- Santiago
Re: Factory questions
Posted by Lionel Villard <vi...@us.ibm.com>.
I did the changes, I'll send a patch when I have a stable version (today).
Lionel
"Santiago
Pericas-Geertsen" To: Lionel Villard/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
<Santiago.PericasGeerts cc: <xa...@xml.apache.org>
en@sun.com> Subject: Re: Factory questions
02/06/2003 10:20 AM
Please respond to
xalan-dev
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lionel Villard" <vi...@us.ibm.com>
>
> Yes right.
>
Ok. Shall I make these changes? Or maybe I can just wait for you send me
the latest patch.
-- Santiago
Re: Factory questions
Posted by Santiago Pericas-Geertsen <Sa...@sun.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lionel Villard" <vi...@us.ibm.com>
>
> Yes right.
>
Ok. Shall I make these changes? Or maybe I can just wait for you send me
the latest patch.
-- Santiago
Re: Factory questions
Posted by Lionel Villard <vi...@us.ibm.com>.
Yes right.
"Santiago
Pericas-Geertsen" To: "xalan-dev " <xa...@xml.apache.org>, Lionel
<Santiago.PericasGeerts Villard/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
en@sun.com> cc: Shane Curcuru/Cambridge/IBM@Lotus
Subject: Re: Factory questions
02/06/2003 09:23 AM
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lionel Villard" <vi...@us.ibm.com>
>
> There is no factory for these nodes.
>
Ok, in that case we should remove the invocation to createNode() in
impl.parser.SimpleNode for all the cases shown below. Right?
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISCHILD:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISATTRIBUTE:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISDESCENDANT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISSELF:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISFOLLOWINGSIBLING:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISFOLLOWING:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISNAMESPACE:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISPARENT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISANCESTOR:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISPRECEDINGSIBLING:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISPRECEDING:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISANCESTORORSELF:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTDOTDOT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTPLUS:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTMINUS:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTXPATH:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTXPATH2:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTDOT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTSLASH:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTROOT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTROOTDESCENDANTS:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTSLASHSLASH:
-- Santiago
Re: Factory questions
Posted by Santiago Pericas-Geertsen <Sa...@sun.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lionel Villard" <vi...@us.ibm.com>
>
> There is no factory for these nodes.
>
Ok, in that case we should remove the invocation to createNode() in
impl.parser.SimpleNode for all the cases shown below. Right?
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISCHILD:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISATTRIBUTE:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISDESCENDANT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISSELF:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISFOLLOWINGSIBLING:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISFOLLOWING:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISNAMESPACE:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISPARENT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISANCESTOR:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISPRECEDINGSIBLING:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISPRECEDING:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAXISANCESTORORSELF:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTDOTDOT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTAT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTPLUS:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTMINUS:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTXPATH:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTXPATH2:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTDOT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTSLASH:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTROOT:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTROOTDESCENDANTS:
case XPathTreeConstants.JJTSLASHSLASH:
-- Santiago
Re: Factory questions
Posted by Lionel Villard <vi...@us.ibm.com>.
There is no factory for these nodes.
"Santiago
Pericas-Geertsen" To: Lionel Villard/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
<Santiago.PericasGeerts cc: Shane Curcuru/Cambridge/IBM@Lotus, "xalan-dev "
en@sun.com> <xa...@xml.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Factory questions
02/05/2003 04:22 PM
Please respond to
xalan-dev
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lionel Villard" <vi...@us.ibm.com>
>
> 1) => the nodes defined as static never appear in the final AST, so
> applications aren't aware of their existence (and consequently can't
> customized them)
>
Hmm, but if I return you a node that is different from the default static
instance (i.e. those in Axis and Singletons), will everything else work?
Should we not use factories for these?
-- Santiago
Re: Factory questions
Posted by Santiago Pericas-Geertsen <Sa...@sun.com>.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lionel Villard" <vi...@us.ibm.com>
>
> 1) => the nodes defined as static never appear in the final AST, so
> applications aren't aware of their existence (and consequently can't
> customized them)
>
Hmm, but if I return you a node that is different from the default static
instance (i.e. those in Axis and Singletons), will everything else work?
Should we not use factories for these?
-- Santiago