> It's not so much about "complexity" as it is readability. The "complexity" in my message refers to the verboseness of the chain-config.xml file. What I am looking for is a possible simpler syntax to do the job.
> If I care what Process Action is then I can see the detail. Goto's > were deemed dangerous because of the behavior that they hide. They > obfuscate the flow of the code. It's not really any different here > either. > > > > <command jumpLabel="L1" className="Class1" /> > > > <command jumpLabel="L2" className="Class2" /> > > > <command label="L1" className="Class3" /> > > > <command label="L2" className="Class4" /> > > I had a longer response prepared to your other post, but decided it > was too wordy. :) One example where the obfuscation comes in is that > I had to look at it for a bit before determining that Class4 was > always run. If a few more commands are thrown in, it really gets > confusing. You do not need to determine Class4 was always run or not, actually it is determined at runtime. Its definition is included in every labeled chain by default. The idea is that you do not have to define a separate chain else where if you could re-use a labeled chain in the current chain definition. You could also ignore labels if any, just use the chain as is. > > -Paul > Jing --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
