Hi Oliver, Oliver Heger wrote:
> Hi, > > the last weeks I was working on a hierarchical alternative to > CompositeConfiguration: the CombinedConfiguration class. The idea is > that this class uses so-called NodeCombiner objects for constructing a > combined node structure from the properties of the contained > configurations. There are special NodeCombiner implementations for > creating override and union combined configurations. > > A CombinedConfiguration is registered as event listener at the contained > configurations. Whenever one of these configurations is modified, the > combined node structure is invalidated. The next time properties of the > combined configuration are accessed, the structure is re-constructed. > > The DefaultConfigurationBuilder class was updated to return an instance > of CombinedConfiguration. So it is possible to access all properties of > the configurations listed in the configuration definition file in a true > hierarchical manner (e.g. making use of the XPATH expression engine). > The configuration definition file format could be somewhat enhanced for > leveraging the new functionality, and I would like to hear your feedback > about these enhancements: > > - All configuration definitions can now have an optional attribute > called "config-name" that assigns a logic name to this configuration. It > is then possible to access this configuration from the resulting > CombinedConfiguration by name. > > - Attributes that contain meta information for the creation of > configuration objects (rather than defining properties to be set on the > newly created objects) now all start with the prefix "config-". This > includes the attributes "config-at", and "config-optional". (For > compatibility reasons the old attributes "at" and "optional" are still > supported if no corresponding prefixed attributes exist.) > > - Configuration declarations in the "override" section now support the > (config-) at-attribute, too. > > - I would like to introduce a new (optional) "header" section that > contains information and property definitions related to the resulting > CombinedConfiguration. This section would allow for instance to set > flags like throwExceptionOnMissing or the list handling flag, choosing > an expression engine and such things. > > WDYT? Sounds all reasonable ;-) - Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
