cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <>
Subject Re: Polishing the flow contracts
Date Mon, 31 Mar 2003 09:17:24 GMT
Pier Fumagalli wrote:
> On 30/3/03 14:43, "Stefano Mazzocchi" <> wrote:
>>Cocoon Object:
>>   cocoon.process(uri, dict, output
> There's another thing I don't really like (and being the implementor of the
> feature, yes, it's my own fault)...
> Currently to the "process" method we ought to pass a nice OutputStream
> instance, which we can create using the Rhino extensions to acess Java
> objects.
> Now, I'd rather like to see it more "factored" out, a some sort of
> "OutputStreamFactory", like we do for source files...
> Anyone has some design hints on how we could achieve that? Anyone else sees
> it as I do as a "design hack" ???

I used it yesterday and I agree with you. Using LiveConnect (the 
javascript/java connector) for such a thing smells of hacky.

We already have the concept of WriteableSources and I think the Source 
selector is already available thru the cocoon.componentManager.

But you would trade

  process ("whatever",{},new;

for something like (sorry for the formatting and the pseudo-code)

  var source = cocoon.componentManager.get( + "/file

which is for sure better but can't go along without LiveConnect.

there is one advantage thought: currently, there is no easy way to 
resolve a uri againts the servlet context real path. This abstraction 
could do such a thing transparently and enforce an inversion of control 
that would definately ease portability across platforms.



View raw message