forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject (Re: Q: Images-Cascade in Resources.xmap)
Date Thu, 20 Apr 2006 08:54:40 GMT
Ferdinand Soethe wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
>>Am I helping or confusing?
> Helping (me), thanks.
> Still, I'm looking at this and wonder.
> It seems to me like these cascades create a behavior that is very hard to
> predict by the user. And probably - unless you really study that
> sitemap - for many developers as well.

The official documented approaches are predictable. However, looking at 
the code is confusing. This is because we are still supporting all the 
legacy ways of doing things.

In my own mind I envision a version 1.0 of Forrest that removes all this 
potential confusion. It is one reason why I wanted the locationmap in 
use. We can deprecate all the old legacy locations and place them in a 
special "deprecated-locationmap". Then when we write the upgrade 
instructions for version 0.x to 1.0 we can say "you should restructure 
your source files to conform to the standard Forrest structure, or you 
can create a custom locationmap to support your own structure, or you 
can use the deprecated-locationmap to just have things work"

The deprecated locaitonmap could either be a FAQ with code snippets or a 
complete locationmap (or both).

However, I have not proposed this yet we have enough unfinished jobs at 
present but...

> Why not define these patterns and put them as settings into Forrest
> properties. Use switches to support these patterns in the sitemap so
> that each usage-patterns has just one predictable behavior.

-1 to doing it in the sitemap. That is what the locationmap is for.

Adding switches and properties just makes the config files really 
confusing and adds loads of processing to each request. However, the 
locationmap approach will actually make things easier to read and makes 
processing more efficient (less locations to check).


View raw message