Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-63550-apmail-cocoon-dev-archive=cocoon.apache.org@cocoon.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 22680 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2004 15:54:14 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199)
  by minotaur-2.apache.org with SMTP; 21 Jul 2004 15:54:14 -0000
Received: (qmail 82713 invoked by uid 500); 21 Jul 2004 15:53:48 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-cocoon-dev-archive@cocoon.apache.org
Received: (qmail 82554 invoked by uid 500); 21 Jul 2004 15:53:47 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cocoon.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
list-help: <mailto:dev-help@cocoon.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@cocoon.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:dev@cocoon.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cocoon.apache.org
Received: (qmail 82499 invoked by uid 99); 21 Jul 2004 15:53:46 -0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0
	tests=
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received: from [217.160.230.40] (HELO mout.perfora.net) (217.160.230.40)
  by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.27.1) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 08:53:43 -0700
Received: from minotaur.apache.org[209.237.227.194] (helo=[127.0.0.1])
	by mrelay.perfora.net with ESMTP (Nemesis),
	id 1BnIwK-2jz5-0MKyxe-0003v9; Wed, 21 Jul 2004 11:23:28 -0400
Message-ID: <40FE8A6E.7080202@reverycodes.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 11:23:26 -0400
From: Vadim Gritsenko <vadim@reverycodes.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
 rv:1.7) Gecko/20040616
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
Subject: Re: [RT] Virtual Sitemap Components
References: <OF4A25BC3C.43F3D805-ONC1256ED4.00673242@sundn.de>
 <40FA6202.1080004@apache.org> <40FC36DD.3030305@apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <40FC36DD.3030305@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Checked: Checked
X-Spam-Rating: minotaur-2.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

Sylvain Wallez wrote:

> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>
> <snip/>
>
>> I have the same understanding after reading the whole thread. Though 
>> I'm not sure if we have consensus on actions. Anyway, what will be 
>> the order of execution of actions? IIUC all actions within a pipeline 
>> are execute *before* the pipeline is executed, aren't they? Will this 
>> behaviour remain?
>> Another question: Is this order of execution of actions by design and 
>> if yes, what's the reason?
>
>
>
> Hey Reinhard, back to basics! Actions are in the "control structure" 
> category, alongside match and select. So they must be executed first, 
> just as matchers and selectors, as their result is used to decide 
> which components are included in the pipeline.
>
> The problems of actions is that they are more than control structures 
> as they are allowed to modify the system state, or perform a redirect, 
> which is not what the pipeline instructions (<map:generate> 
> <map:transform> etc) are doing today. That's why actions may be 
> forbidden in VPCs, except maybe for virtual readers.


Any Action can be re-written as a Matcher in 10-15 seconds (only 
exception is this redirect mentioned above... shall we remove redirector 
from action interface? ;-) ). Thus, I totally miss the point why actions 
should be disallowed.

Vadim