Hi Dennis, Not publishing the schema's for the codegen XML's is my fault actually. Since things were modified rapidly in the first stages, I wanted to wait until things are stable. But it slipped my mind. I'll add the necessary schema's soon.
Ajith On 3/30/06, Dennis Sosnoski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Chuck Williams wrote: > > > "Ajith Ranabahu" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 03/29/2006 > > 07:37:48 AM: > > > >>I'm not familiar with the velocity or freemarker template languages > >>but In any case I guess we'll be introducing another dependancy! Also > >>if we special case the templating language, it makes things harder > >>for the people who would need to tweak the code generator. > >> > >> > > > > As someone who's tweaked the code generator to add support for choice > > particles, recursive data types, etc., I'd like to second Ajith's > > point. Xsl is a broadly known syntax that works well for the > > generation of final Java code. Having the code generator structured > > as it is now, creating a POJO representation of the schema, > > transforming that into a DOM, and then using xsl to transform the DOM > > into Java classes, is clean, easy to understand, and quite flexible. > > I'm somewhat less thrilled by the use of XSLT for code generation, but > passing data in XML is certainly a plus. Overall I found the code > generation structure very flexible and easy to extend. I didn't find any > documentation of the actual XML formats, though, so I added debug > logging of the XML documents used for code generation in > MultiLanguageClientEmitter to simplify understanding the existing XSLTs. > > - Dennis > -- Ajith Ranabahu
