RE: CVS Update: Barracuda

> If it is as simple as this, maybe we can leave the object
> repository assembler alone and create a separate jython
> assembler.  Maybe someone can fill in what the actual assembler
> would look like?
>
> Christian, what do you think about this?

Well, I think we should still expand ObjectRepositoryAssembler (as per my
previous email), but...

I'm not at all opposed to creating a separate assembler for this approach
either. org.enhydra.barracuda.plankton.data.JPythonAssembler maybe? I'd love
to see a working example,a dn I'll bet Diez and Iman could whip something up
in no time.

Like I said in a previous email, I think there's plenty of room for multiple
solutions here - it just offers more choices to those in the community, and
I think that's a good thing.

So Diez, Iman...what do you guys think? Want to volunteer? :-)

Christian
----------------------------------------------
Christian Cryder
Internet Architect, ATMReports.com
Project Chair, BarracudaMVC - http://barracudamvc.org
----------------------------------------------
"Coffee? I could quit anytime, just not today"


> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of Jacob Kjome
> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 8:21 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Barracuda] CVS Update: Barracuda
>
>
> At 12:28 PM 6/20/2003 +0200, you wrote:
>
> ----------
> from org.enhydra.barracuda.core.util.dom import DefaultDOMLoader
> from org.enhydra.barracuda.core.util.dom import
> XMLCDeferredParsingDOMFactory
>
> # wherever this comes from... But its no problem to declare it :)
> sc = this.servletContext
> dl = DefaultDOMLoader.globalInstance
> df = XMLCDeferredParsingDOMFactory()
> df.servletContext = sc
> dl.defaultDOMFactory = df
> -----------
>
> What would the assembler that this gets fed to look like?  I'm
> not clear on that?  Would it be something like...
>
> public void assemble() {
>    boolean success = JythonInterpreter.interpret(theInputStream);
>    logger.debug("successful interpretation of jython script? " + success);
> }
>
>
> If it is as simple as this, maybe we can leave the object
> repository assembler alone and create a separate jython
> assembler.  Maybe someone can fill in what the actual assembler
> would look like?
>
> Christian, what do you think about this?
>
>
> Jake