--- Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> As you may have seen in the CVS messages I have
> moved most of the setup
> code that was in the render() method to the
> getContentHandler() method.
> This is necessary because not everyone uses the
> render() methods,

Well, what is wrong with everyone using the render()
method for 1.0?   It is precisely between major
releases, as opposed to within minor patches--that
APIs may change.  That's the direction we've been
going for 1.0--and we've had zero complaints on the
user list about it.

> sometimes you simply need to have a ContentHandler
> to send SAX events to.

But evidently not, given the code functionality
unrelated to getting the content handler that you
needed to move out of the render() functions, and into
getContentHandler() to get this to work.

Why are you providing multiple access paths to doing
the same thing in FOP?  What is wrong with calling the
render() function--how does calling
getContentHandler() help performance over just having
a render() functions?

> Some of our examples (and some of our basic test
> cases) use that
> approach.

They can be rewritten.  What I need to hear is how
performance suffers (or the coding becomes
inordinately burdensome) as a result of just having
the render() functions exposed.  Juggling multiple
API's doesn't help anyone.


Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard

Reply via email to