cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew C. Oliver" <acoli...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [RT] SpitScript - B-Logic that doesn't suck ( Re: [RT] Flowmaps)
Date Sun, 23 Jun 2002 13:45:15 GMT
>
>
>Ok. Here's my vision: a flowscript is the location where you place your
>flow logic. The flow logic is the collection of instructions that
>indicate how to make the transition from one page to another.
>
>Everything else shouldn't be there.
>  
>

So why do you need scripting for that?  It seems inconsonant with the 
rest of Cocoon and even unnecessary.
There is relatively minor difference between what XSLT does (match 
conditions and output a result) and
what the flowscript does and the sitemap and what the flowscript does. 
 The gap is I suppose a mid sitemap
decision on what the next step should be, therefore, why can the sitemap 
not be extended with minor conditionals
similar to the ones in XSLT and make flow decisions in XML versus 
Javascript.

I regard this flowmap decision as taramount to multiple inheritance.  I 
think its a decision that will later come to be
regretted.  I also think I'll be seeing Cocoon applications that are 
virtually implemented exclusively in Javascript instead
of using the sitemap at all.

>  
>
>I hear you, but since we all agree that business logic shouldn't be in
>the flowscript, I don't understand the need to discuss whether or not
>it's good to have business logic defined in a scripting language.
>
>This is an entirely separate concern.
>  
>
Again, we're discussing something taramount to allowing multiple 
inheritance in Java.  The issue is not whether YOU
Stefano would code your business logic in the scripting language, its 
whether lots of folks would.  And hence creating more
rediculous and unmaintainable software.  Its possible to create bad 
software in any tool, but some tools enable you to create worse 
software.  Its why Java succeeded despite being far poorer performing 
over C++.  C++ gave you more rope to hang yourself.  Its an underlying 
reason you write Cocoon in Java and not PERL.  PERL allows almost all of 
the features of Java, but it not only allows but encourages bad form. 
 Cocoon has areas that are coded in bad form and without comment, yet 
I'm able to read them moreso than if they were written by the same 
person in PERL for instance.  The point being is that this is one of 
those features that enocourages and allows bad form and will probably 
grow into a beast.

>  
>
>It's hard to define what a business logic is, but it's easy to know if
>this has anything to do with describing the transition between pages
>(flow).
>  
>
But a scripting language will allow you to do either.  

>  
>
>>When you made the sitemap you also talked about what it *isn't*, not
>>only what it *is*.
>>Spitscript is what should stay out of the flowmap.
>>    
>>
>
>No, no, no. With this you are assuming that it's equivalent to use a
>scripting language to describe business logic. This is yet to be
>discussed, but this is an entirely different concern from this
>discussion, thus my call to stop it until we have finished focusing on
>the flowscript.
>
>  
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: cocoon-dev-unsubscribe@xml.apache.org
For additional commands, email: cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org


Mime
View raw message