I should be thread-safe, the way it is used here. You could of course,
cache the SAXParserFactory instance but I doubt the performance
improvement would be measurable. getParser is probably not the best name
if you look at it from a bean-oriented angle but it's not that it's
called many times anyway. Do you think we should rename it?
On 19.12.2003 13:13:45 John Austin wrote:
> I found the following snippet in the class FOFileHandler:
>
> ===============================================================
> /**
> * @see org.apache.fop.apps.InputHandler#getParser()
> */
> public XMLReader getParser() throws FOPException {
> return createParser();
> }
> ===============================================================
>
> and the createParser() method
>
> ===============================================================
> /**
> * Creates <code>XMLReader</code> object using default
> * <code>SAXParserFactory</code>
> * @return the created <code>XMLReader</code>
> * @throws FOPException if the parser couldn't be created or
> configured for proper operation.
> */
> protected static XMLReader createParser() throws FOPException {
> try {
> SAXParserFactory factory = SAXParserFactory.newInstance();
> factory.setNamespaceAware(true);
> factory.setFeature(
> "http://xml.org/sax/features/namespace-prefixes";, true);
> return factory.newSAXParser().getXMLReader();
>
> <snip/>
>
> ===============================================================
>
> Now it would seem to me that a 'getter' method should not go around
> creating objects every time it needs to. It hust doesn't look right.
>
> I assume that SAXParserFactory is thread-safe.
Jeremias Maerki
