[windup-dev] Rules API

[Lincoln Baxter, III]

1) The  (when, perform) structure would be basic for all rules?

Yes, there are actually a few more structures:

.addRule()
.when() // if
.perform() // then
.otherwise() // else

2) This seems like it will build object tree, which will then be
processed, right? No space for custom code?

You can already do exactly what you just suggested :) Custom code is no
problem, it just accepts an object like any normal Java code - it's just
Java.

3) Isn't that a fluent API overuse? How about something like:

I don't know what you are referring to here as overuse, but yes, I am
exaggerating the use of the fluent API to make a point. The rules could be
completely un-fluent and still use these same APIs. I'm not sure I see the
point/difference of the sample you've shown.

4) .withDoctype("http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0") ?
doctype is a property...  Better .with(PropNames.DOCTYPE,
"http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0") ?

I agree, some kind of more general structure here would probably be better.

5) Could the variable be filled outside .when () ? But perhaps just a
matter of taste.

Absolutely you could - and yes, it's all a matter of taste :)


On Fri, May 2, 2014 at 7:26 PM, Ondrej Zizka <ozizka at redhat.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> WRT rules API, as proposed at
>
> https://github.com/windup/windup/blob/master/engine/config/api/src/main/java/org/jboss/windup/addon/config/example/MavenExampleConfigurationProvider.java#L22
>
> It's nice, with some comments.
>
> I know it was typed in a hurry, but anyway:
>
> 1) The  (when, perform) structure would be basic for all rules?
>
> 2) This seems like it will build object tree, which will then be
> processed, right? No space for custom code?
>
> 3) Isn't that a fluent API overuse? How about something like:
>
> new ConfigBuilder( ... ){{
>      addRule( new MavenPomRule( this, ... ){
>               boolean when(  ) { return Selection.exists(XMLFile.class,
> "xmls").with("doctype", DOCTYPE_POM); }
>               void perform( MavenPomInfo mpi ){ ... }
>          }
>      );
> }}.run();
>
> It's verbose now but with Java 8 lambdas, it would be less.
>
> While it's a bit more verbose, it would have obvious benefits of better
> debuggability, and would better leverage Java's features like
> inheritance (imagine AbstractXmlFileRule and it's subclasses for
> whatever one would want to do with a XML file, having few of its
> properties passed as parameters.
>
> Btw this code above is inspired by Wicket and GWT.
>
> 4) .withDoctype("http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0") ?
> doctype is a property...  Better .with(PropNames.DOCTYPE,
> "http://maven.apache.org/POM/4.0.0") ?
>
> 5) Could the variable be filled outside .when () ? But perhaps just a
> matter of taste.
>
> More later when we have some more examples.
>
> Nice!
> Ondra
> _______________________________________________
> windup-dev mailing list
> windup-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/windup-dev
>



-- 
Lincoln Baxter, III
http://ocpsoft.org
"Simpler is better."
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/windup-dev/attachments/20140505/6cb1284f/attachment.html