ant-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Antoine Levy-Lambert" <anto...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: Resource.getURL()
Date Thu, 21 Sep 2006 13:02:49 GMT
Hi,

I would like to add getURL() to Resource before Ant 1.7 ships.

I would add it to the Resource base class, and to ZipResource, FileResource.

I am not clear whether it is better to signal that a particular Resource does not provide
URL by throwing UnsupportedOperationException (as Matt suggested) or by returning null.

Concerning custom URLProtocolHandler (s), I am not clear how this works ?

Regards,

Antoine
-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Datum: Thu, 21 Sep 2006 10:08:48 +0100
Von: Steve Loughran <stevel@apache.org>
An: Ant Developers List <dev@ant.apache.org>
Betreff: Re: Resource.getURL()

> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Matt Benson <gudnabrsam@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> --- Antoine Levy-Lambert <antoine@gmx.de> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hello Matt,
> >>>
> >>> thanks for fixing my fixes !
> >>>
> >>> did you already add getURL() to all Resource(s) ?
> >>> this would be cool to be able to always set the
> >>> SystemId in case of XML documents of all sorts.
> >> I have been thinking it might make sense to add
> >> getURL() to Resource.  Did a discussion on that
> >> already take place?
> > 
> > I don't remember any.
> > 
> > Given that Resource as a class and not an interface we are able to add
> > new methods even after 1.7.0 without running the risk of breaking the
> > code of people who implement their own resources.  Given that there
> > wouldn't be any code in Ant 1.7.0 that used getURL() we should defer
> > adding the method as well, IMHO.
> 
> maybe, but if a subclass adds its own getURL() method bad things happen. 
> Also, if subclasses ought to override it, then we dont give ant1.7-based 
> resources a warking.
> 
> > 
> >> And, for example, what would we do for resources of
> >> nonstandard "protocols"?  Would a StringResource with
> >> value "foo" return "string:foo" as its URL?  Should we
> >> install custom protocol handlers for built-in
> >> resources and encourage the same be done for
> >> third-party resource implementations?
> > 
> > +1 for custom protocol handlers.
> 
> Its very hard to add custom protocol handlers in java once you have a 
> classloader tree. and you increase the effort needed to implement a 
> resource.
> 
> How about having a hasURL interface that resources can implement? That 
> way things like my <random> component dont need to bother.?
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@ant.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@ant.apache.org


Mime
View raw message