I guess I should attach the patch :)

On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 7:14 PM, Justin Deoliveira <[email protected]>wrote:

> Ok, there is a patch that adds a qualified name to the FunctionName api. An
> interesting part is the process filter factory that wraps process in filter
> functions. There were two ways to go. Have the factory store the functions
> by qualified name... or as it did before store them by a single string of
> the form "ns:local". I opted for the former but there is a potentially issue
> for api that calls directly the factory and not go through factory finder.
> Anyways, its a rough patch at this point, so not really tied to it.
> Interested in hearing thoughts and feedback.
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Justin Deoliveira <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 1, 2011 at 12:26 AM, Jody Garnett <[email protected]>wrote:
>>
>>>  Go for Name across the board; we also may have interpretability between
>>> Functions and Process; and it would also benefit from use of the qualified
>>> Name.
>>>
>> I agree it is cleaner... but its not an easy api change. See next comment.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> I don't think introducing Name would be much of a trouble since the
>>> current Functions would just used as is; without a namespace.
>>>
>>> Yup, but updating the api is tricky since getName() is already taken and
>> returns a single string. What I am thinking is leave Operator.getName() as a
>> String. Perhaps deprecating it and changing its name to getLocalName(). Then
>> in FunctionName we add a method getFunctionName() that returns Name rather
>> than String. And once Operator.getName() goes through the full deprecation
>> cycle we can add back in Name getName(). Messy...
>>
>>
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>>
>>> On Saturday, 1 October 2011 at 3:48 AM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Expanding on the previous thread about extended operators. So I like the
>>> idea of not rolling out a new interface and just use functions like we have,
>>> basically making extended operators syntactic sugar for functions. The only
>>> potential roadblock is that function names are not namespace qualified and
>>> extended operator names are. So two potential options.
>>>
>>> 1. Update the api of FunctionName to make getName() a Name rather than
>>> just a String.
>>> 2. Just accept the limitation of non namespace qualified extended
>>> operator names... essentially ignoring the namespace.
>>>
>>> Thoughts? I sort of lean toward 2 since I think it is simpler and doesn't
>>> involve any api changes. And given that today function names aren't
>>> qualified i imagine its an ok limitation to impose.
>>>
>>> -Justin
>>>
>>> --
>>> Justin Deoliveira
>>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>>> Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously
>>> valuable.
>>> Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security
>>> threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
>>> sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Geotools-devel mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Justin Deoliveira
>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>> Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Justin Deoliveira
> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
> Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
>
>


-- 
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

Attachment: function_qname.patch
Description: Binary data

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable.
Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to