I started to add a few RulesSeq ... looks pretty neat so far not to
mention that LiftRules is reducing its size. And these var can
actually be publicly exposed as val-s.
On Dec 9, 10:30 pm, Marius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree with append/prepend naming. As far as ListBuffer goes I'm not
> sure ... I mean you are correct about it, but these "rules" will be
> done once in boot and I'm not sure who actually adds more then a few
> items .. in practice.
>
> At the end of the day I don;t mind using ListBuffer or List ...as I
> think in this specific context it has little consequence. If this
> approach is fine with everyone I can start implementing it.
>
> Br's,
> Marius
>
> On Dec 9, 10:25 pm, "Jorge Ortiz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I would use a ListBuffer as the underlying representation. I would call the
> > methods "append" and "prepend" (LiftRules.snippet.append,
> > LiftRules.dispatch.append, etc.). I would also make them immutable
> > as-needed. ListBuffer caches toList so that it's very efficient if you don't
> > append/prepend in between calls to toList.
>
> > On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 2:20 PM, Marius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > I'm not sure if this is the case ... if we want context dependent
> > > Snippets then probably using loc snippets is the right place
>
> > > How about something like:
>
> > > abstract class RulesSeq[T] {
> > > var rules : List[T] = Nil
>
> > > private def safe_?(f : => Any) {
> > > doneBoot match {
> > > case false => f
> > > case _ => throw new IllegalStateException("Can not modify after
> > > boot.");
> > > }
> > > }
>
> > > def prependRule(r: T) {
> > > safe_? {
> > > rules = r :: rules
> > > }
> > > }
>
> > > def appendRule(r: T) {
> > > safe_? {
> > > rules = rules ::: List(r)
> > > }
> > > }
> > > }
>
> > > Br's,
> > > marius
>
> > > On Dec 9, 10:12 pm, "Jorge Ortiz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Hmmmmm... I can think of situations where such mutations are useful
> > > > after
> > > > Boot (app/prependSnippet comes to mind). Maybe they can be made
> > > > immutable
> > > > (.toList) as necessary?
>
> > > > --j
>
> > > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 2:01 PM, David Pollak
> > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > > > > And we should freeze the lists after Boot is finished. The
> > > > > permutation
> > > > > methods should throw exceptions post-boot
>
> > > > > On Dec 9, 2008 11:39 AM, "Jorge Ortiz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > > > Seems like prime opportunity for an abstraction...
>
> > > > > Why not make them (*gasp*) mutable data structures with prepend/append
> > > > > methods?
>
> > > > > --j
>
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 1:35 PM, Marius <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > > wrote: >
> > > > > > > Hi. > > Unfortunatel...
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Lift" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
