Hi Robby! that feature is already available, have a look at the cocoon-sax 'builder'[1] package! Your first email was received, maybe there was just a minor async issue on your provider. HTH, have a nice day! All the best, Simo
[1] http://s.apache.org/dZm http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://www.99soft.org/ On Wed, Jul 6, 2011 at 10:46 AM, Robby Pelssers <robby.pelss...@ciber.com> wrote: > > Hi Simone, > > I have one question to the current interface of Pipeline. I know you wrote a > SAXPipelineBuilder to allow chaining. > > But it would have been much nicer if the Pipeline interface itself would have > been chainable. > > void addComponent(T pipelineComponent); --> Pipeline<T> addComponent(T > pipelineComponent); > > void setup(OutputStream outputStream); --> Pipeline<T> > setup)(OutputStream outputStream); > > Same for other methods for which it makes sense to chain them. > > This would allow me to switch from > > @Test > public void testXQuery1() throws Exception { > Map<String, Object> parameters = new HashMap<String, Object>(); > parameters.put("sentence", "split words test"); > XQJGenerator generator = new > XQJGenerator(this.getClass().getResource("/xquery/stringtest.xquery")); > generator.setXQDataSource(xqds); > Pipeline<SAXPipelineComponent> pipeline = new > NonCachingPipeline<SAXPipelineComponent>(); > pipeline.addComponent(generator); > pipeline.addComponent(new XMLSerializer().setIndent(true)); > pipeline.setup(System.out, parameters); > pipeline.execute(); > } > > to > > @Test > public void testXQuery1() throws Exception { > Map<String, Object> parameters = new HashMap<String, Object>(); > parameters.put("sentence", "split words test"); > XQJGenerator generator = new > XQJGenerator(this.getClass().getResource("/xquery/stringtest.xquery")); > generator.setXQDataSource(xqds); > Pipeline<SAXPipelineComponent> pipeline = > new NonCachingPipeline<SAXPipelineComponent>() > .addComponent(generator) > .addComponent(new XMLSerializer().setIndent(true)) > .setup(System.out, parameters) > .execute(); > } > > which basically is what you intended to achieve if i'm correct. > > I know it's quite a big API change but designing the API with chainability in > mind makes sense. > > Robby > > >
