Re: Defaulting pipeline inputs

I think we should need to discuss that point on the telcon

It looks like to me as V.next thing (as some other shortcuts we already removed)

Mohamed

On 8/8/07, Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> wrote:
> I have to say, defaulting the pipeline inputs so that this "works":
>
>   <p:pipeline xmlns:p="...">
>     <p:identity/>
>   </p:pipeline>
>
> is turning out to be a real messy business in my implementation.
>
> Right now, I load the pipeline, setup the pipeline inputs and outputs,
> do a bunch of analysis to setup the connections, etc., then I run the
> pipeline.
>
> Except setting up the pipeline inputs and outputs fails because the
> pipeline doesn't appear to have any inputs.
>
> So I could try to load the pipeline, do a bunch of analysis to setup
> the connections, etc., setup the pipeline inputs and outputs, then I
> run the pipeline.
>
> Except that's going to fail too because *if the pipeline does have
> inputs or outputs*, there aren't going to be any bindings for them.
>
> I'm not saying the problem is insurmountable, I'm not even arguing for
> a change to the status quo. I'm just saying, @$@%#$!. :-)
>
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
>
> --
> Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Throughout history the world has been
> http://nwalsh.com/            | laid waste to ensure the triumph of
>                               | conceptions that are now as dead as the
>                               | men that died for them.--Henry De
>                               | Montherlant
>
>


-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 €

Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2007 16:54:54 UTC