cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Portier <...@outerthought.org>
Subject [cforms binding] consistency in leniency
Date Wed, 31 Dec 2003 13:41:37 GMT
While fixing up my recent 'lenient' sample...
I noticed that leniency is not dealth with in a consistent manner 
throughout the binding implementations:

one binding in the pack 'ValueJXpathBinding' catches the possible 
JXPathException and just logs them as a warning...

I take it this try/catch attitude stems from a time when I didn't know 
of the existance of setLenient() in JXPath :-)

So, since
1/ we hapilly do use that now
2/ have it available as an attribute on all bindings
3/ and by default set leniency to true
(and since
4/ I hopefully smashed the last bug in that area some minutes ago)


I am removing the try-catch-warn approach: if the binding is set to 
non-lenient then the consequences of that should be as obvious as 
possible and thus thrown up in the face of the end-user (which should be 
the testing web-app developer at that time)


I don't think I overlooked something here, but am wide open for other 
views and insights...

-marc=
PS: by the way: I noticed that setting the leniency doesn't seem to have 
any effect on Javascript objects, they seem to be lenient by themselves?
-- 
Marc Portier                            http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source, Java & XML Competence Support Center
Read my weblog at                http://blogs.cocoondev.org/mpo/
mpo@outerthought.org                              mpo@apache.org



Mime
View raw message