uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joern Kottmann <kottm...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: "Standard" UIMA typesystem
Date Fri, 09 Sep 2016 14:09:55 GMT
Well you are forced to use it when you have to use an AE using it.
I think the problem with the JCas is that people think, because we are
offering it as part of UIMA, that is is acceptable to use it, but the truth
is it really isn't. If it would be me deciding, the JCas would be the first
I would throw away for UIMA 3 (and also many other things).


On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Richard Eckart de Castilho <rec@apache.org>

> On 09.09.2016, at 15:49, Peter Klügl <peter.kluegl@averbis.com> wrote:
> >
> > I get the point with code generation though.
> >
> > Am 09.09.2016 um 15:11 schrieb Joern Kottmann:
> >> I am personally think the convenience the JCas brings is outweighed many
> >> times by all the complexity
> >> and disadvantages which come with it, e.g. code generation step, having
> >> extra special classes and mostly impossible
> >> to reuse the written code.
> Again, nothing forces anybody to actually make use of the JCas.
> If it does not match your taste, then do not use it.
> If you find the CAS interface to be lacking some convenience,
> check out the getFeature() and setFeature() methods in uimaFIT FSUtil
> and also the CasUtil select* methods in uimaFIT.
> Cheers,
> -- Richard

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message