Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-xml-cocoon-dev-archive@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 18221 invoked by uid 500); 31 Mar 2003 06:44:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact cocoon-dev-help@xml.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org Received: (qmail 18203 invoked from network); 31 Mar 2003 06:44:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO zeus.hapra.at) (212.52.194.171) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 31 Mar 2003 06:44:36 -0000 Received: from dyn165089.wlan.jku.at ([140.78.165.89]) by zeus.hapra.at with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.2966); Mon, 31 Mar 2003 08:42:05 +0200 Subject: Re: Polishing the flow contracts From: Jakob Praher To: cocoon-dev@xml.apache.org In-Reply-To: <3E874633.2070003@apache.org> References: <3E874633.2070003@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1049092680.1177.8.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.2.0 Date: 31 Mar 2003 08:38:01 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 31 Mar 2003 06:42:05.0406 (UTC) FILETIME=[A4CBCFE0:01C2F750] X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Am Son, 2003-03-30 um 21.32 schrieb Stefano Mazzocchi: > >>4) the following functions > >> > >>Flow Object: > >> flow.import() -> imports another flowscript > > > > > > > Hmmm... Should we allow cross-language (when/if we're going to have it) > > flowscripts interaction? Because otherwise I'd prefer a name such as > > "interpreter".... > > I don't get it. What's wrong with the name flow? > I think the same as Pier here, you merely don't include a flow, but include or import another javascript file. Using flow here, I think, leads the user to false assumption, that this is flow specific. For instance using jruby or another great scripting language (jython, ...), this would work somewhat different like Module::include in jruby or import in jython. -- Jakob