On Jul 7, 2008, at 18:09, Andreas Delmelle wrote:
On Jul 7, 2008, at 15:22, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
I know I'm late on this one but I've only just stumbled over it while
playing with the AFP renderer in the GOCA branch. This change is very
dangerous as it essentially breaks every FOP extension that uses
character content, especially those not developed inside the FOP
I'm lucky it doesn't (shouldn't) break Barcode4J but I would strongly
suggest to revert this interface change especially since the method
signature doesn't change while the semantics do.
I'd rather keep it the other way around, like it is now. It's much
less confusing if the same parameters are used as in the SAX
If this breaks external code, then my apologies (it even broke some
internal classes too, but those issues didn't show when running the
test-suite; Max discovered them).
Still -1 for reverting.
Note: I do appreciate the feedback, and I see where this can become
problematic, but OTOH, if there is a class that relies on the ending
index being passed, the solution is rather straightforward.
The change was ultimately also motivated by the simple question:
"Why did we need to compute the end-index off start and length for
every characters() event?"
The answer: "Because FONode.addCharacters() expected it." That's the
only reason, so it made more sense to simply make it a length (no
additional operation needed) and only compute the end index if we
really need it...
That said: Would it relieve your concerns a bit if this change were
better documented? (Which I'd be glad to take care of, since I
neglected to do so in spite of the change being so high up in the
hierarchy /and/ exposed to potential subclasses... :/)