Am 01.11.19 um 11:11 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau: > Through the spi IMHO and if it can be ambiguous use an ordinal or > priority to let it be overriden maybe?
Do we want users to be able to overwrite our functions? Is the "int:" namespace free for everyone? Should we break the context startup in case of duplicate functions in the registry? Felix > > Le ven. 1 nov. 2019 à 10:46, Felix Schumacher > <felix.schumac...@internetallee.de > <mailto: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 >> <mailto: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 >> <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org >> <mailto:dev-h...@tomcat.apache.org> >>
