I haven't looked at the XSLT code but I have a question
in my mind that I need to answer about it.

I wonder what it is that is being generated and what were 
the design alternatives to the codegen implementation.

One question that popped in to my head was:

Is there 'missing polymorphism' here ?

As I said, I only have the question at this time. 

On Sat, 2003-12-13 at 12:12, Glen Mazza wrote:
> -1.  I'd like to hold off on this, at least until I
> can gain a better understanding of the autogenerated
> code.  I may still to the same conclusion as the other
> committers, but Finn's endorsement of the XSLT--as
> well as the long work of those like Keiron who have
> worked with the XSLT files--suggests that there are
> significant time benefits to using them.  (At work, I
> use "SQL to write SQL" all the time, and love the time
> efficiencies that result.)
> If we check in the Java code, then changes may end up
> being made to those files directly, which will result
> in the XSLT files becoming unregeneratable.  Or, every
> run of the XSLT will require re-modification of the
> changes made manually to all the Java
> files--potentially dozens--100's of files.  So I'm
> kind of leery about doing this at the moment.
> [Actually, I'm looking forward to studying the XSLT
> that generates these files--as I mentioned to Clay
> that CVS and Ant were two of the initial benefits you
> get by working on FOP, apparently being about to write
> Java code using XSLT is a third one...i.e., Yeehaw!,
> as I believe he had put it... ;)]
> Glen
> --- "J.Pietschmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Finn Bock wrote:
> > > I like the generation process as it allowed me to
> > try out and experiment 
> > > with different optimizations. I don't think that I
> > realisticly could 
> > > have added caching of compound properties or
> > changed the abs2rel/rel2abs 
> > > code if I had to change the Maker classes
> > manually.
> > 
> > If its common code, that's what class hierarchies
> > and
> > inheritance are made for.
> > 
> > J.Pietschmann
> > 
> > 
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing.
> http://photos.yahoo.com/

Reply via email to