commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ceki Gülcü <>
Subject RE: [joran] example (was Re: [Latka][Proposal] Make Jelly a required dependency?)
Date Mon, 14 Oct 2002 21:58:06 GMT

At 13:48 14.10.2002 -0700, Scott wrote:
> > Property 0 requires the XML processor to access elements that
> > have been already defined. With Digester which is SAX based,
> > there is no way for a rule to trigger parsing of an element
> > that was already parsed by the SAX parser. In other words,
> > using SAX you cannot access elements backwards or forwards.
> > You only have access to the current element.  Please correct
> > me if I am wrong.
>You are not wrong, the only way to do this would be to force loggers to
>come first, or build everything and then throw it away if you don't need
>it.  Another way would be to cache the elements and then refire them if
>you find a logger that needs them.

Refiring events goes against the pattern/rule paradigm. It seems like
to redoing the work done by the digester environment.

At instantiation time an appender can already use resources as
appenders were not originally intended to be cached. This could be
changed at the cost of rewriting (appender) code.

>Is there anyway to create and throw away an appender?  Or to require
>that loggers come first?  The other way would be to cache the appender
>nodes somehow in a custom rule, that is then accessible when the time
>comes to need to load it.
>Am I making sense now?

Very much so.

>So, the default Digester setup cannot do this, unless you are willing to
>construct and then throwaway unnecessary objects.


TCP implementations will follow a general principle of robustness: be
conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from
others. -- Jon Postel, RFC 793

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message