commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Schofield <sean.schofi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [chain] LookupCommand's return value
Date Wed, 16 Feb 2005 13:08:14 GMT
> As it is now, there's no way to abort a looked-up chain without
> causing the base chain to also abort.  It seems like this would not
> always be the desired result.  [snip]

Interesting way of thinking about it.  I still think the way
LookupCommand works now should be the default behavior.

-1 on changing that (which I don't think you are really proposing)

> I'm sure one could reorganize the overall config so that the first
> chain ended without being aborted, and then the commands which would
> have come after are instead on a separate chain behind a conditional
> Lookup command.  This isn't that hard to do, but I'm still not sure
> that I believe the class as implemented should *always* return the
> value of the looked up command.  Could we make a config value out of
> it?

Right now I am indifferent but as soon as I encounter a similar use
case in my own programming I am sure I will be +1 ;-)
 
[snip}
> I'm just hesitant to add a new dependency on my own whim.  JEXL isn't
> very heavy (132 K) but I think people are keen on keeping Chain light
> too.

Keeping chain light would be nice.  I don't know too much about JEXL
personally although I will be investigating it shortly as an
alternative to Velocity for some template stuff I have.  How would you
propose doing it if you didn't use JEXL?
 
> Joe

sean

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org


Mime
View raw message