RE: chunked output

> 
> Listener would do fine by me.  I don't know that it would do fine
> by Fitnesse, though. The interface there is through 
> stdin/stdout/sdterr,
> so I'd assume I'd need some kind of marshal,  unmarshal interface.
> 
> Micah?
> 
> John Roth
> 

Listner would do fine by me as well... as long as each implementation had a
Listener derivative that spit out a table at a time.

Perhaps this is a good point to share my thoughts on FitNesse integration.
Right now there are two components, FitFilter for single executions and
RecursiveAllFiles for running suites.  RecursiveAllFiles is clucky and I'd
like to get rid of it.  There should be only ONE piece that glues FitNesse
to FIT and that should be FitFilter.

FitFilter could be a much better solution to running suites.  Currently
FitFilter works like this:
1. html is recieved from stdin
2. read from stdin until EOF
3. process
4. write results to stdout
5. exit

To run a suite FitFilter would have to be able to seperately run several
documents all in the same jvm or process.  The new flow of operation would
be somthing like this:

1. html is recieved from stdin
2. read from stdin until the end of document
3. process and write results to stdout one table at a time (to enable
chunking)
5. wait for next client action 
6. exit signal is recieved from stdin
7. exit

This implies some protocol through which FitNesse and FIT will comunicate.
It can be rediculously simple but all implementations of FIT would have to
abide by it.  

FitFilter could make use of some Listner that writes a table at a time.

I realize this is becoming complex but I believe it to be the simplest
solution given the constraints.

Micah