cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vadim Gritsenko" <vadim.gritse...@verizon.net>
Subject RE: [PROPOSAL] Ref: Bug 7713 - Optional Implicit precondtion checking in matchers
Date Wed, 03 Apr 2002 16:19:51 GMT
> From: Michael Melhem [mailto:michaelm@fztig938.bank.dresdner.net]
> 
> On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 08:05:40AM -0500, Vadim Gritsenko wrote:

...

> > Michael,
> >
> > Have you considered using just one pipeline? Or two (and no more
than
> > two)?
> >
> >
> > > This is not a good thing, especially if you have lots of complex
> > pipelines.
> >
> > Here I fail to see how this is much simpler than using action. Why
not
> > just:
> >
> > ...
> >
> > <map:act type="let-person-in-if-they-have-session">
> >
> > > 	<map:match pattern="URI1*">
> > > 		...
> > > 	</map:match>
> > >
> > > 	<map:match pattern="URI1*">
> > > 		...
> > > 	</map:match>
> > >
> > > 	...
> >
> > </map:act>
> 
> Hi Vadim,
> 
> Thanks for your comments. I have not considered wrapping multiple
> match blocks within a single act block like that.
> 
> Still, wouldnt the above nest everything one (or more) layer(s)
deeper,
> making things less simple?

This might be just my personal opinion, but I feel that having all
protected resources gathered together in one place under one action is
better than same resources scattered among multiple pipelines and
different parts of the sitemap.


> Consider the situation where the act block is large and spans more
> than one page? 

I can easily imagine this. Moreover, I have similar constructs in my
sitemap.


> Wouldn't handling the exception be more difficult in that case
> where if im not mistaken, you would need to ensure any
> matching URI that does not require a session is not within the act
> block.

I do group all the resources under one act element, as described above.

If you think that multi-page sitemap is not readable, than it is time to
use sub-sitemaps. Collect all protected resources in the sitemap, and
mount it from the main sitemap. You can wrap mount instruction with the
action.


> IMHO I think a more scalable solution would be....
> 
> 	<!-- session check here would not be a good idea -->
> 	<map:match pattern="login">
> 		<map:parameter name="conditional"
value="unConditional"/>
> 		...
> 	</map:match>
> 
> 	<map:match pattern="URI1*">
> 		...
> 	</map:match>
> 
> 
> 	<!-- requires no session check -->
> 	<map:match pattern="simpleLinks-page">
> 		<map:parameter name="conditional"
value="unConditional"/>
> 		...
> 	</map:match>
> 
> 	<map:match pattern="URI2*">
> 		...
> 	</map:match>

BTW, your solution is less performing. One action will be executed once,
skipping all of the matchers, which could sum to noticeable amount of
CPU cycles (especially RE matchers)

 
> All that this proposal (Bug 7713) does is allow matchers to be more
> configurable, and does not take away any existing functionality.

I'm not sure I like this proposal. At present moment, this looks to me
that instead of solving management issues you have, you are trying to
employ technology to hide these issues deeper.


> thoughts?

Above.

Vadim


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


Mime
View raw message