Re: just a thought

2002-08-14 Thread J.Pietschmann
Oleg Tkachenko wrote: >> Writing a custom iterator for the children >> list would solve this... > > I agree with you, but this one seems to be simple and would benefit by > decoupling fo tree internal structure and its usage. Usual design > pattern could be used - hierarcy of custom iterators:

Re: just a thought

2002-08-14 Thread Oleg Tkachenko
J.Pietschmann wrote: > appropriate cast. Unfortunately, in the maintenance branch > the children vector is protected and directly accessed in a > lot of places, putting the test+cast code and the handling > of the one-child-only special case everywhere seemed to be > too much work. Writing a cus

Re: just a thought

2002-08-13 Thread J.Pietschmann
"Arved Sandstrom" wrote: > I overlooked the "PCDATA as child" case...taking that into account there is > no doubt that 1 child is an important case. But I am still not convinced > this case needs treatment different from the "2 or more children" case as > Oleg proposed. I also considered what

Re: just a thought

2002-08-13 Thread Oleg Tkachenko
Joerg Pietschmann wrote: > I thought I posted this two weeks ago. Sorry Joerg, I have missed your post. > I made some > measurements with the FOP examples and a few other > FO files an get roughly the following statistics: > 45% no child (mostly text nodes, but also fo:page-number and fo:region-

RE: just a thought

2002-08-13 Thread Arved Sandstrom
> -Original Message- > From: Joerg Pietschmann [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: August 13, 2002 4:53 AM > To: FOP Dev > Subject: Re: just a thought > > Oleg Tkachenko wrote [ Snipped Oleg's proposal ] > > I thought I posted this two weeks ago. I made

RE: just a thought

2002-08-13 Thread RamanaJV
HI devs, Can we directly say Driver.render(Document). It gives me the following error. I'm sure the document is good. Any help? [ERROR]: Logger not set [INFO]: building formatting object tree java.lang.NullPointerException at org.apache.fop.apps.StreamRenderer.startRenderer(Stream

Re: just a thought

2002-08-13 Thread Joerg Pietschmann
Oleg Tkachenko wrote > It's probably not too late to consider some trivial optimization of fo > tree in redesign code. In a typical fo document probably about 30% of > elements have no children or have only one child (text node usually), so > instead of eager > protected ArrayList children = ne

Re: just a thought

2002-08-12 Thread Jeremias Maerki
gt; > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: just a thought > > > > It's probably not too late to consider some trivial optimization of fo > > tree in redesign code. In a typical fo document probably about 30% of > > elements have no children or have only one child (tex

RE: just a thought

2002-08-12 Thread Arved Sandstrom
> -Original Message- > From: Oleg Tkachenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: August 12, 2002 8:16 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: just a thought > > It's probably not too late to consider some trivial optimization of fo > tree in redesign code. In a

just a thought

2002-08-12 Thread Oleg Tkachenko
Hello! It's probably not too late to consider some trivial optimization of fo tree in redesign code. In a typical fo document probably about 30% of elements have no children or have only one child (text node usually), so instead of eager protected ArrayList children = new ArrayList(); in FObj.