commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Simon Kitching <>
Subject Re: [digester] initial code for Digester2.0
Date Fri, 04 Feb 2005 02:52:16 GMT
On Thu, 2005-02-03 at 23:36 +0100, Oliver Zeigermann wrote:
> Hi Simon!
> On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 23:57:30 +1300, Simon Kitching <> wrote:
> > I look forward to seeing your ideas on stringifying trees of elements.
> Isn't it about time to give Digester2 a place in SVN, so I can either
> create patches against it or  directly commit to it. What about a
> branch in commons proper? Or at least the sandbox?


Do you have commit rights to Digester? If not, I'd be happy to propose a

> > actions*. And I generally do debugging by enabling commons-logging
> > output rather than write custom debugging actions anyway. Can you think
> > of some usecases where this would be useful?
> Hmmm, using SAX it always is a bit tricky to get a good idea how your
> XML document that is being parsed *really* looks like. commons-logging
> is no good in that case. If you have something that collects the whole
> document and regenerates it this can be a very valuable debug
> information. Consider the stuff you parse is not in your file system,
> but comes from a stream from a remote server it isn't all obvious what
> is looks like.

Good point.

> > Note also that currently RuleManager can return prebuilt lists when
> > match is called; no List object needs instantiating. However if "always
> > present" actions have to be inserted into each list, then a new List
> > object is required to be created for each match call.
> I understand what you say, but do not understand why a new list would
> have to be build with each match call. Why can't you statically addd
> the "always present" action into the list? Coul you explain?

Possible, I guess. Just a bit tricky...



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

View raw message