Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 63494 invoked from network); 4 Nov 2005 19:54:03 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 4 Nov 2005 19:54:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 43596 invoked by uid 500); 4 Nov 2005 19:54:00 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-commons-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 43530 invoked by uid 500); 4 Nov 2005 19:53:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: List-Help: List-Post: List-Id: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Reply-To: "Jakarta Commons Developers List" Delivered-To: mailing list commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Received: (qmail 43519 invoked by uid 99); 4 Nov 2005 19:53:59 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.6 required=10.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [192.87.106.226] (HELO ajax.apache.org) (192.87.106.226) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 04 Nov 2005 11:53:59 -0800 Received: by ajax.apache.org (Postfix, from userid 99) id 3DE8A23D; Fri, 4 Nov 2005 20:53:36 +0100 (CET) From: bugzilla@apache.org To: commons-dev@jakarta.apache.org Subject: DO NOT REPLY [Bug 35882] - [jxpath] Suggested BeanPropertyFactory implementation X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo Message-Id: <20051104195336.3DE8A23D@ajax.apache.org> Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2005 20:53:36 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG� RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT . ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND� INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE. http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35882 ------- Additional Comments From kweiner@gmail.com 2005-11-04 20:53 ------- Is someone else planning on improving the implementation I provided so that it addresses the concerns outlined by Dmitri? I am willing to help if required. Regarding Dmitri's comments: > 1. JXPath does not currently require JDK 1.5. Do we want to introduce that dependency at this point? Removing the dependency on JDK 1.5 from this implementation is trivial. I think it is only the @Override annotation that is 1.5 specific. I have a version of this running in 1.4 so I can provide that if necessary. > 2. The factory does not handle either collections or indexed properties. Handling collections and indexed properties seems kind of complicated. I might need some help to figure out how this could be done. Couldn't the javadoc simply state that collections and indexed properties are not yet supported and we could add such support in a future release? > 3. I believe this factory will sometimes generate NullPointerException. I haven't run into any NPE in practice, but I'm willing add some null guards if you can identify where they are necessary. > 4. I think if we were to bundle an implementation of AbstractFactory with JXPath, it should handle all supported object models, including DOM, JDOM, DynaBeans, maps etc. This is currently beyond my understanding with respect to JXPath and its use of my BeanPropertyFactory. Could you explain how DOM, JDOM, etc. relate to the AbstractFactory? Thanks. -- Configure bugmail: http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: commons-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: commons-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org