[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: What shall the filter do to bottommost translators

From: Sergiu Ivanov
Subject: Re: What shall the filter do to bottommost translators
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2008 21:30:18 +0200

On Mon, Dec 22, 2008 at 7:19 PM, Sergiu Ivanov <unlimitedscolobb@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 4:13 PM, <olafBuddenhagen@gmx.net> wrote:
Wouldn't it be simpler and clearer to process only the first suffix, and
pass back any remaining ones as the retry_name, so that they
automatically get handled correctly when the client does the retry?...
(It seems to me that if you had done it that way, it would have been
clearer from the beginning how stacking of dynamic translators is to be
Well, setting translators in a simple loop is a bit faster, since, for
example, you don't have to consider the possibility of an escaped
``,,'' every time (and this is not the only reason). OTOH, I'd rather
consider myself an adept of the following syntax: ``file,,x,y'', which
is also simpler to implement in a loop.

Unfourtunately, I cannot really feel the advantage of using retries in
the case of creating dynamic translator stacks.
I'm rather inclined not to follow the concept of retries, because a
new retry *requires* a new lookup, which is meaningless in case we are
building a dynamic translator stack.

BTW, could you please expound on the question why would we need extra
shadow nodes in a dynamic translator stack? I fail to see how this
would make our life simpler :-)
I guess I can understand the reason now: are these shadow nodes
(probably I shouldn't call them "extra") a way to control the way how
the filter traverses the translator stack?..



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]