RE: [Tm4j-developers] bug in TopicMapWalker

[Kal A. <ka...@te...>]

Hi Conal,

I think that maybe the "right" thing to do here would be to change the
definition of getBaseTopic() so that it must always return a Topic object
and must return this when it has no base topic. Firstly that actually seems
more natural and would let getBaseTopic() be used in a chain of method calls
more safely; and secondly I think that there are other utilities (not just
TopicMapWalker) that make this assumption.

Cheers,

Kal

-----Original Message-----
From: tm4...@li...
[mailto:tm4...@li...] On Behalf Of Conal
Tuohy
Sent: 31 August 2005 23:26
To: tm4...@li...
Subject: [Tm4j-developers] bug in TopicMapWalker

We're writing a new back end which supports only "static merging" and
this caused us to discover a bug in TM4J.

On line 85 of org.tm4j.topicmap.util.TopicMapWalker it assumes that a
Topic must have a non-null "base topic", though the javadoc for
Topic.getBaseTopic() says that it may return null if a topic has no
"base topic".

Because our back end uses static (eager) merging, we don't have "base
topics" at all, so we had an Topic implementation like this:

	public Topic getBaseTopic() {
		// doesn't support dynamic merging so this doesn't apply
		return null;
	}

BTW to keep TopicMapWalker happy I've since changed it to:

	public Topic getBaseTopic() {
		// doesn't support dynamic merging so this doesn't apply
		return this;
	}

Cheers

Con




-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Tm4j-developers mailing list
Tm4...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tm4j-developers