DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL, BUT PLEASE POST YOUR BUG RELATED COMMENTS THROUGH THE WEB INTERFACE AVAILABLE AT <http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12756>. ANY REPLY MADE TO THIS MESSAGE WILL NOT BE COLLECTED AND INSERTED IN THE BUG DATABASE.
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12756 [Patch] CallMethodRule/CallParamRule Summary: [Patch] CallMethodRule/CallParamRule Product: Commons Version: 1.3 Final Platform: All OS/Version: All Status: NEW Severity: Enhancement Priority: Other Component: Digester AssignedTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ReportedBy: [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have a use case which can't be done with the Digester's standard rules. (I hope I haven't overlooked Digester's API.) After some experiment, I realized with some enhancement I could make CallMethodRule/CallParamRule work. I think the use case is pretty common and generic. The use case is like this: I need to call a 3rd party API Parent.add(Child child, Condition condition) with the XML data: <parent> <child .../> <condition .../> </parent> I can't use SetNextRule as it takes only one object from the stack. CallMethodRule/CallParamRule comes close, but it allows only parameters coming from body texts or attributes, not generic objects from the stack. So, I made the following changes to CallMethodRule/CallParamRule: * Changed the param stack frame datatype from String[] to Object[] * Overloaded CallParamRule to allow configuration to get the parameter from the stack * Made CallParamRule stateless so that it works probably in nesting -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
