W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xproc-dev@w3.org > December 2011

RE: XML Calabash and Saxon 9.4

From: David Lee <dlee@calldei.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 14:17:50 -0500
To: "'Norman Walsh'" <ndw@nwalsh.com>, "'XProc Dev'" <xproc-dev@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002d01ccbe82$e9fdc4d0$bdf94e70$@calldei.com>
#2 is 'bad'. IMHO.
In the Java world handling multiple versions of an API at runtime is not
only 'hard' but inefficient.
You'll find everywhere you need a method or class you'll instead need a
Reflection and Object.
Then you get into real naughtiness, IMHO.

You forgot #3

3.  Stick with Saxon 9.3 for a while ...

or maybe thats implied with #1


David A. Lee

-----Original Message-----
From: Norman Walsh [mailto:ndw@nwalsh.com] 
Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 2:04 PM
To: XProc Dev
Subject: XML Calabash and Saxon 9.4

Ok world,

Here's the deal: I want to make XML Calabash work with Saxon 9.4. And
I'm sure I can. But some of the underlying Saxon APIs have changed, so
if I do, then it won't work with Saxon 9.3 anymore.

1. I can just announce that as of some version, Saxon 9.4 is required.

2. Or I can go to the trouble of providing abstractions around the
   changed APIs and adapting to whatever version of Saxon is present.

Choice 1 is easy easy for me, impossible for you with Saxon 9.3.

Choice 2 is hard for me and will eventually have to be ripped out as
I'm sure that sooner or later I'll write new code that uses 9.4 APIs
and I'm not likely to be willing (or possibly even able) to back-port
those changes to 9.3.

So, if choice 1 is hugely inconvenient for you, now would be the time
to say something.

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman Walsh
Lead Engineer
MarkLogic Corporation
Phone: +1 413 624 6676
Received on Monday, 19 December 2011 19:18:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:03:09 UTC