--- Dale Anson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not up on the code, but I like the concept, and
> I like the idea of
> retrofitting existing tasks to use a generic
> resource rather than
> methods for each specific type. My original
> question was about having
> the XmlProperty task read from a property as well as
> a file, I've always
> wanted similar functionality in the "get" task -- it
> only writes the
> response to a file, when on occassion it would be
> much handier to write
> it to a property so subsequent tasks could act
> directly on the response.
>
<get> is just one example of the motivations behind
this (fairly large) effort. :)
-Matt
> Dale
>
>
> Matt Benson wrote:
>
> >--- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>On Fri, 4 Nov 2005, Matt Benson
> >><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>--- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Matt Benson
> >>>><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>--- Stefan Bodewig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Hmm, I'd prefer (ab?)using PropertyHelpers for
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>this instead of
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>>adding new helpers.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>><copy resource="${resource:url:someurl}"/> or
> >>>>>>something similar.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>Hmm... this appears doable... it will require
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>that the properties
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>be resolved by IntrospectionHelper instead of
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>RuntimeConfigurable
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>though, which could require the usual
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>backwards-compatibility
> >>
> >>
> >>>>>acrobatics.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>Do we really need to resolve that in
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>IntrospectionHelper? Why?
> >>
> >>
> >>>What's the alternative? setResource(String)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>(after
> >>
> >>
> >>>which every implementor has to call resolution
> >>>
> >>>
> >>code)?
> >>
> >>I guess I need to re-read the code, its been a
> long
> >>time. IIUC you
> >>think we need to modify IntrospectionHelper so
> that
> >>the correct object
> >>type can be created right there, correct?
> >>
> >>OK, I see the problem now. PropertyHelper - or
> the
> >>way we use it -
> >>isn't really suited for property expansions that
> >>yield something other
> >>than a String.
> >>
> >>It's probably easier to have some kind of
> >>ResourceFactory that
> >>returned Resource instances (or subclasses
> thereof)
> >>based on Strings
> >>and explicitly code support for this into
> >>IntrospectionHelper (much
> >>like the special cases for boolean or File). Your
> >>original idea,
> >>isn't it?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Yeah, basically. :) So if anyone other than
> myself
> >and Stefan have been paying attention to this
> >conversation, does that scare anyone? DD? ;)
> >
> >-Matt
> >
> >
> >
> >>Stefan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >
> >>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>For additional commands, e-mail:
> >>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >__________________________________
> >Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005
> >http://mail.yahoo.com
> >
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >For additional commands, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
> >
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
__________________________________
Yahoo! FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.
http://farechase.yahoo.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
