Return-Path: 
 <ant-dev-return-18023-apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive=jakarta.apache.org@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-jakarta-ant-dev-archive@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 32172 invoked by uid 500); 28 Sep 2001 07:45:10 -0000
Mailing-List: contact ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
list-help: <mailto:ant-dev-help@jakarta.apache.org>
list-unsubscribe: <mailto:ant-dev-unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
list-post: <mailto:ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Delivered-To: mailing list ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org
Received: (qmail 32162 invoked from network); 28 Sep 2001 07:45:10 -0000
Message-ID: <013001c147f1$c89912d0$6501a8c0@GILAMONSTER>
From: "Erik Hatcher" <jakarta-ant@ehatchersolutions.com>
To: <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Cc: <philsurette@home.com>
References: <3.0.32.20010927141649.00cf87e0@zbl6c008.corpeast.baynetworks.com>
 <055401c14787$8a79a6f0$6501a8c0@GILAMONSTER>
 <20010928004629.ULCV13193.mss.rdc2.nsw.optushome.com.au@there>
 <00c701c147d1$af210bc0$6501a8c0@GILAMONSTER> <3BB43142.603504F8@home.com>
 <002b01c147e1$8078ab10$6501a8c0@GILAMONSTER>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Script enhancement to standardize the "project" object
 exposed
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2001 00:47:11 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300
X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N

Actually I just tried "this" and it doesn't work.... it must be a special
BSF auto-provided object which contains all the other objects that
Script.java exposed (a "for each in" gave me that info).

I modified it to be "me", like below:

            beans.put("me", this);

and it all worked well.  So anything other than "this" would be fine.   What
is the best choice?   "me"?   "task"?  "thisTask"?   Here is my example
script now:

<project default="test">
  <property name="xyz" value="123"/>
  <target name="test">
    <script language="javascript"> <![CDATA[
      proj = me.getProject();
      echo = proj.createTask("echo");
      main.addTask(echo);
      for (i in me) {
        echo.setMessage(i);
        echo.execute();
      }
    ]]> </script>
  </target>
  <target name="main"/>
</project>

I'm sure there is a better way to get output, but I'm just using the method
shown in the documentation for now.   The above outputs this which shows
that "me" is a Task and has access to all the methods and member variables:

     [echo] getTaskName
     [echo] location
     [echo] taskName
     [echo] notifyAll
     [echo] runtimeConfigurableWrapper
     [echo] project
     [echo] setLocation
     [echo] setTaskName
     [echo] setProject
     [echo] getRuntimeConfigurableWrapper
     [echo] setSrc
     [echo] log
     [echo] execute
     [echo] setDescription
     [echo] addText
     [echo] getDescription
     [echo] equals
     [echo] notify
     [echo] class
     [echo] perform
     [echo] wait
     [echo] setOwningTarget
     [echo] toString
     [echo] hashCode
     [echo] description
     [echo] init
     [echo] setLanguage
     [echo] getProject
     [echo] maybeConfigure
     [echo] getOwningTarget
     [echo] getClass
     [echo] owningTarget
     [echo] getLocation

I'll gladly submit an updated patch once we decide the best name for the
task and if we want to expose the Project directly, although I'm inclined to
only expose the Task and let the script get at the project reference if it
wants.   If a committer patches it, please make sure to modify the
documentation patch to match the actual name chosen and to reflect that its
a Task object now rather than a Project.

    Erik

----- Original Message -----
From: "Erik Hatcher" <jakarta-ant@ehatchersolutions.com>
To: "ant-dev" <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
Cc: <philsurette@home.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 10:50 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Script enhancement to standardize the "project" object
exposed


> I'm all for "target" being added also.   Actually if we just add "this"::
>
>     beans.put("this", this);
>
> it would give access to the instance of the <script> task itself which
could
> then get the project and target directly using getProject and
> getOwningTarget.
>
> Actually using "this" seems to be the cleanest short-term patch in order
to
> allow easy access to everything a custom task could access under a simple
> pre-defined fixed name.   I had thought of this change before, but didn't
> remember that idea until you brought up the "target" suggestion.
>
> Could whoever commit this modify the Script.java change to the above?
>
> Thanks,
>     Erik
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Phil Surette" <philsurette@home.com>
> To: <ant-dev@jakarta.apache.org>
> Cc: <ant-user@jakarta.apache.org>
> Sent: Friday, September 28, 2001 1:13 AM
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Script enhancement to standardize the "project"
object
> exposed
>
>
> > What about adding in the target as well, e.g. something like:
> >
> >              addBeans(project.getTargets());
> >              addBeans(project.getReferences());
> >
> >              beans.put("project", getProject());
> >
> > +            beans.put("target", getOwningTarget());
> > +
> >              BSFManager manager = new BSFManager ();
> >
> > When I first started using the script tag a couple of weeks ago
> > I just naturally expected to see both the target and the
> > project predefined in all scripts. They are the context for the
> > script. Having access to the grandparent (project) - while a
> > _big_ improvement - without access to the parent (target)
> > just seems wrong somehow.
> >
> > (yes, you can get at the target if you know its name, but this
> > is just as inelegant as needing to know the project name: it creates
> > an easily broken dependency between the task name and the embedded
> > script and a real trap for all those cut-and-pasters out there)
> >
> > Erik Hatcher wrote:
> > >
> > > Well, with a +1000000, I couldn't resist making the change I proposed.
> :)
> > >
> > > Attached is a patch against the ANT_14 versions of Script.java and the
> > > documentation file for this task.
> > >
> > > Here is the sample build file that I used to test my change with:
> > >
> > > <project default="test">
> > >   <target name="test">
> > >     <script language="javascript"> <![CDATA[
> > >       echo = project.createTask("echo");
> > >       main.addTask(echo);
> > >       for (i=1; i<=10; i++) {
> > >         echo.setMessage(i*i);
> > >         echo.execute();
> > >       }
> > >     ]]> </script>
> > >   </target>
> > >
> > >   <target name="main"/>
> > > </project>
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Peter Donald" <donaldp@apache.org>
> > > To: <ant-user@jakarta.apache.org>
> > > Sent: Thursday, September 27, 2001 5:01 PM
> > > Subject: Re: Javascript errors
> > >
> > > > On Fri, 28 Sep 2001 05:06, Erik Hatcher wrote:
> > > > > This problem actually could be alleviated with a patch to the
> <script>
> > > task
> > > > > such that the project reference was fed to BSF with the name
> "project"
> > > > > rather than as the name of the project.   I've got a few such
> similar
> > > > > patches on my to-do list for the <script> task to make using it
> easier.
> > > I
> > > > > won't have time to get to this patch very soon though, but it
> appears to
> > > be
> > > > > a straightforward change.
> > > >
> > > > +1000000 ;)
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers,
> > > >
> > > > Pete
> > > >
> > > > When a stupid man is doing something he's ashamed of, he always
> > > > declares that it is his duty.
> > > > George Bernard Shaw
> > > >
> > >
> >
>   ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >                     Name: patchfile.txt
> > >    patchfile.txt    Type: Plain Text (text/plain)
> > >                 Encoding: quoted-printable
> >
>
>