Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 64225 invoked by uid 500); 6 Dec 2002 12:40:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 64209 invoked from network); 6 Dec 2002 12:40:07 -0000 Message-ID: <3DF09AA4.1030104@outerthought.org> Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 13:40:04 +0100 From: Marc Portier User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, nl-be MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Subject: Re: Changes made to flow system.js References: <20021205101316.GA27326@fztig938.bank.dresdner.net> <5462E91E-08E6-11D7-941D-00039398D61E@apache.org> <20021206100908.GA24270@fztig938.bank.dresdner.net> <20021206105546.GD1153@bremen.dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de> In-Reply-To: <20021206105546.GD1153@bremen.dvs1.informatik.tu-darmstadt.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N disclaimer: this is at the danger of making a complete fool of myself have only been following this discussion from a distance so here is the fool's thought: 1. Given the fact that: you could still do things according to: >>>"Finish" what? The problem with that is that you could still do things >>>after the page was sent back to the client. Advanced users might want >>>to use this fact to do all sorts of nasty things. 2. My experience with method-names containing "and" is that they point out some bad SoC... typically if you have multiple ones it actually shows the semantics are to be split up into two methods: So from a clueless end-user-point of view (just seeking semantics per se) I guess sendPage(); //doing just that, leaving plenty of room to do other stuff (while the client gets an answer back already?) either or not followed by continue(); wait(); saveState(); prepareForContinuation(); noneOfTheAbove(); would make the most common sense... but maybe is changing a bit the use cases/current approach? >> >>Interesting, didnt think of that. So does this mean you can send >>multiple pages back to the client without client intereaction.. ? > > > Don't think so (because the browser is not listening). But you could > write a document locally (to a file) or if we had an EmailSerializer > one could send an email or ... like > > .... > sendPageAndContinue("Confimation.email"); > sendPageAndBlock("Confirmation.xml"); // or whatever name it is currently > .... > > Chris. multiple sendPage()'s after each other should then result in some exception since the first one would of have done something like 'closed' the Httpresponse's printStream (or at least sent out the HTTP response header, I think the servlet API has a method for checking this) as for sending email: I think it makes sense to call that sendEmail() (from a semantical point of view... but this is probably blasphemy to anyone that ever considered an emailSerializer as something usefull) regards, -marc= PS: don't flame my stupidity here, pointers to obvious stuff I missed are welcome -- Marc Portier http://outerthought.org/ Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center mpo@outerthought.org mpo@apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org