commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henrib <>
Subject Re: [JEXL] functional directions
Date Thu, 13 Aug 2009 11:12:01 GMT

Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> I say we keep it simple ...

Fine with me.

Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> Using that comparison, the place where JEXL excelled was to fill the
> gap that JSP EL had in terms of assignments, method invocations and a
> generally more seamless bridging to Java objects in the expression
> language context. Surrounding procedural Java code took the place of
> the JSP taglib (XML, as you say above) syntax as and when needed.

Agreed; the UnifiedJEXL for text nodes & attributes is aiming at this goal

Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> Not really a direction per se:
>  * We've had some syntactic additions, but its been organic growth
>  * We do have a JSR-223 engine for convenience, I think we shouldn't
> go too far with it (no jexl.conf à la JEXL-63 please)
>  * Same with Main classes, good for playing around but important to keep
> simple
> No coincidence that my latest comment on JEXL-70 contains "The purpose
> of Commons JEXL is to build JEXL, not complex command-line classes to
> use JEXL" (and by way of extension, other such peripheral bits).

Ok... sort of. I've yet to understand the inclusion of jsr-223 support
(Scripting language for the java platform) within JEXL; an external
"jexl-script.jar" that implements the factory & the main method would have
made the convenience part clearer.
Imho, the main method in JEXL itself should be a test class in the test

Rahul Akolkar wrote:
> I'm happy to keep things the way they are -- no more, no less for 2.0.
Thanks for betty crystal clear. :-)

View this message in context:
Sent from the Commons - Dev mailing list archive at

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message