Re: [PATCH] Re: [PROPOSAL] Modification of the code generated byJasper2

2002-05-17 Thread Kin-Man Chung
Denis, Glad that you agree. About the timing for the patch, I think now is OK. Jasper 2 is fairly stable and the only bug that may interact with our fix is 4964 and I already have a fix for it; but am hold off committing it because struts depends on this bug, and my fix would break it! :-( Now

Re: [PATCH] Re: [PROPOSAL] Modification of the code generated byJasper2

2002-05-17 Thread Denis Benoit
Mr Chung, I agree completely with your proposed change. Two arrays is all right for me. On Fri, 17 May 2002, Kin-Man Chung wrote: This way, the size of the stack is the maximum number of nesting of the tags, which should much smaller than the number of tags in the page. Such information is

Re: [PATCH] Re: [PROPOSAL] Modification of the code generated byJasper2

2002-05-17 Thread Kin-Man Chung
Now, about the level of nesting, shouldn't the information be available through the PageInfo object? After all, the purpose of this class is A repository for various info about the page under compilation. And Generator currently has access to an instance of it. So, if PageInfo had

Re: [PATCH] Re: [PROPOSAL] Modification of the code generated byJasper2

2002-05-16 Thread Kin-Man Chung
Denis, First let me mention a couple of improvements over the existing codes that was generated for flattening out the try/catch block. See if you agree with me. 1. I notice the following code pattern that is now generated. bitmask.set(1); addTagToVector(tags, 1, new

Re: [PATCH] Re: [PROPOSAL] Modification of the code generated byJasper2

2002-05-16 Thread Denis Benoit
Mr Chung, You mentioned three areas where the code could be improved. On Thu, 16 May 2002, Kin-Man Chung wrote: 1. I notice the following code pattern that is now generated. bitmask.set(1); addTagToVector(tags, 1, new Integer(_jspx_eval_eg_foo_0)); if

Re: [PATCH] Re: [PROPOSAL] Modification of the code generated byJasper2

2002-05-09 Thread Denis Benoit
Mr Chung, On Thu, 9 May 2002, Kin-Man Chung wrote: Denis, One way to get rid of BidSet is to keep the state of things that needs to be done in the (now virtual) finally block. Since the try blocks are properly nested, it is sufficient to increment the state when entering a try block,

Re: [PATCH] Re: [PROPOSAL] Modification of the code generated byJasper2

2002-05-09 Thread Kin-Man Chung
See intermixed. Date: Thu, 09 May 2002 20:48:27 -0400 (EDT) From: Denis Benoit [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: [PROPOSAL] Modification of the code generated by Jasper2 Good idea, but I think it would be hard to accomplish as presented. Look again at your pseudo-code:

Re: [PATCH] Re: [PROPOSAL] Modification of the code generated byJasper2

2002-05-09 Thread Denis Benoit
Kim, On Thu, 9 May 2002, Kin-Man Chung wrote: If we have distinct values for each state, theorectically we can implement a state transition machine in the finallies. Something like the following. while (state 0) { switch (state) { case 0: ...