cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Unico Hommes" <Un...@hippo.nl>
Subject RE: Migrating TreeProcessor to Fortress
Date Mon, 10 Nov 2003 16:44:18 GMT
 

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sylvain Wallez [mailto:sylvain@apache.org] 
> Sent: maandag 10 november 2003 17:31
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> 
> Unico Hommes wrote:
> 
> <snip/>
> 
> >>>Here the match element both represents a component 
> declaration of a MatchNode to the container _and_ a 
> configuration element representing a child node to the PipelineNode.
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>Nope: the component declaration is in the <map:matcher> 
> declaration in the <map:components> section. This is where 
> its class, configuration and all the component declaration stuff is.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Off course this is not what I meant. I am talking about 
> hosting ProcessingNodes as components in Fortress.
> >  
> >
> >>A <map:match> is a _use_ of that component. Sure, it can be 
> transformed in a component declaration by merging in the 
> configuration that's in <map:components> for each use of a 
> particular component, but you'll end up with as many 
> different independent components as there are sitemap 
> _statements_, which will be a huge memory eater.
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >Do you really think so? Off course there is some overhead 
> associated with hosting an object as a component. But today 
> all statements are also represented by it's own 'pseudo' 
> component no? In fact it's very similar to what we have today 
> except for that all the component management will be taken 
> care of by Fortress. As far as I know a component in Fortress 
> is represented by the component instance itself and its 
> handler. In the case of singleton components - wich is what 
> all ProcessingNode components would be - the handler is a 
> *very* lightweight object wrapping the instance.
> >  
> >
> 
> Sorry, but I'm a bit lost here. Aren't we mixing processing 
> nodes and sitemap components alltogether?
> 

Yes, we can host them in the same container. Can't think of a reason not
to. In order to make this more secure so that for instance a Matcher
can't get hold of a CallNode we could make these two categories
available from different ServiceManagers that's all.

Unico

> Sylvain
> 
> -- 
> Sylvain Wallez                                  Anyware Technologies
> http://www.apache.org/~sylvain           http://www.anyware-tech.com
> { XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, 
> Projects } Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance  -  
> http://www.orixo.com
> 
> 
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message