Modified: src/java/org/apache/cocoon/xml AbstractXMLProducer.java
Log:
fixed bug 27678, thanks to Peter Brant: setConsumer() calls setContentHandler() + setLexicalHandler()
public void setConsumer(XMLConsumer consumer) { this.xmlConsumer = consumer; - this.contentHandler = consumer; - this.lexicalHandler = consumer; + setContentHandler(consumer); + setLexicalHandler(consumer); }
Unfortunately this change breaks XSP. I debugged a bit into to see what happens. The reason is in CocoonMarkupLanguage.PreProcessFilter:
...
From an object oriented polymorphism POV this looks really hacky. Something like "because we have to provide an implementation for others in a different way, lets use the super implementation that provides the correct implementation for us".
If the changed/patched AbstractXMLProducer is in use, setContentHandler() and setLexicalHandler() are called with this.filter as parameter and the code generation fails. If the implementation of both methods is removed, you can not set the handlers of the filter.
Of course we can just revert the patch, but the above is still what I would call hacky.
WDYT?
Option 1: Do not call super.setConsumer() above, use super.setContent/LexicalHandler.
Chose this one. Though it does not solve my feelings above. Must this be by design? Couldn't this.filter in PreProcessFilter given to LogicsheetCodeGenerator so that it can call setConsumer() on this object directly? Or does this break other parts of the design. I found it really confusing ...
And question, are there more places like this?
I don't hope so.
PS I use a bit of XSP; JXTG currently does not yet offer everything you need...
I don't want to remove XSP in near future ;)
Joerg
