Through the spi IMHO and if it can be ambiguous use an ordinal or priority
to let it be overriden maybe?
Le ven. 1 nov. 2019 à 10:46, Felix Schumacher <
felix.schumac...@internetallee.de> a écrit :
>
> Am 28.10.19 um 23:06 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau:
>
> +1 for quotes
>
> Can the "function" support be pluggable either with an explicit registry
> or a SPI? Would be awesome to enrich it in "super tomcat" instances
> (thinking to meecrowave, tomee and maybe spring boot).
>
> The function support is already pluggable (by the configuration file :),
> but I thought about adding SPI.
>
> It is unclear to me, how to determine the namespace ("int:" in the httpd
> example), should it be given by the Service Provider? Would "int" be
> reserved for our own functions? How could we achieve such a reservation
> mechnism?
>
> Felix
>
>
> Le lun. 28 oct. 2019 à 21:43, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> a écrit :
>
>>
>>
>> On 27/10/2019 11:27, Felix Schumacher wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > while looking at the RewriteMap configuration, I noticed, that parsing
>> > of the RewriteMap directive is a bit minimal. Parameters are split at
>> > whitespace (no quotes will be recognized) and only the first of the
>> > optional parameters will be used.
>> >
>> > Should this be changed? If so, should we introduce quoting capabilities
>> > to gather the "one" optional parameter, or allow multiple parameters?
>> >
>> > Version "quote":
>> >
>> > RewriteMap m1 example.MyMap "some params"
>> >
>> > Version "multiple"
>> >
>> > RewriteMap m2 example.OtherMap one two three
>> >
>> > Or should it be a combination?
>>
>> That is probably the most flexible option. I'd lean towards this option
>> but would be happy to support the majority view if different.
>>
>> > "quote" would be sort of compatible with the current interface, as we
>> > still have only one parameter. "multiple" would be a nicer interface for
>> > the implementer of the map.
>> >
>> > Another thing I noticed, is that the httpd rewrite map feature has a few
>> > builtin maps, that could be useful to supply with our implementation.
>> > Any thoughts on supplying those? (I thought about the maps
>> > int:[toupper,tolower,escape,unescape], txt:, rnd: and possibly a new one
>> > called jdbc:{jndi-connection}:{sql statement with placeholder}. For
>> > these elements a quote detection would be a must)
>>
>> I don't recall any requests for these on the users list but maybe that
>> is because the feature isn't that well known.
>>
>> Mark
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>>
>>
