Glen Mazza wrote:
> On another issue, Victor, *please* don't forget to
> fully qualify the import statements -- that's one of
> our coding conventions and very helpful in grokking
> code -- a "import org.apache.fop.apps.*;" was added
> last week in the PDFRenderer.java:
Well, it isn't a matter of
No big deal--just fixed it.
--- "J.Pietschmann" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Glen Mazza wrote:
> > fully qualify the import statements
>
> Eclipse's "organize imports" sorts this out quickly.
> I'm sure other IDEs have similar features.
> CheckStyle
> and PMD reports should point out these too.
Glen Mazza wrote:
fully qualify the import statements
Eclipse's "organize imports" sorts this out quickly.
I'm sure other IDEs have similar features. CheckStyle
and PMD reports should point out these too.
J.Pietschmann
-
To unsub
On another issue, Victor, *please* don't forget to
fully qualify the import statements -- that's one of
our coding conventions and very helpful in grokking
code -- a "import org.apache.fop.apps.*;" was added
last week in the PDFRenderer.java:
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-fop/src/java/org/
Victor Mote wrote:
> OK, that is good information. Essentially, I have caused that unwanted
> overhead. So probably what I should do is store the StaticContentLM
> reference in the related RegionLM. I'll work on that.
Regions don't have LMs, so I created a HashMap of the StaticContentLMs in
the P
Joerg Pietschmann wrote:
> Well, the actual layout for static content can obviously differ
> from page to page because of markers and page numbers.
>
> However, constructing a LM is expensive, and in the original
> code I wrote a new LM would have been created for each page if
> the FO didn't keep
Well, the actual layout for static content can obviously differ
from page to page because of markers and page numbers.
However, constructing a LM is expensive, and in the original
code I wrote a new LM would have been created for each page if
the FO didn't keep it, which would have cause unwanted o
Chris Bowditch wrote:
> just a thought on this. The previous behaviour of the
> StaticContent LM that
> you describe above is like a singleton. Isnt the reason
> StaticContent LM is
> behaving like a singleton, because static content should only be laid out
> one time? It may not change behaviour
From: "Victor Mote" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
FOP Developers:
I just committed a change (for the FO isolation work) that may have broken
my general rule of not changing the substance of what is going on in the
code. The fo/pagination/StaticContent stored a reference to a
StaticContentL
FOP Developers:
I just committed a change (for the FO isolation work) that may have broken
my general rule of not changing the substance of what is going on in the
code. The fo/pagination/StaticContent stored a reference to a
StaticContentLayoutManager and returned that when one was needed, only
10 matches
Mail list logo
