commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rahul Akolkar <rahul.akol...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [JEXL] functional directions
Date Thu, 13 Aug 2009 18:00:30 GMT
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 7:12 AM, Henrib<hbiestro@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip/>
>
>
> 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.
<snap/>

In my mind, its the tradeoff between three additional smallish classes
and the complexity of adding a new build artifact -- if you want to
look at adding an m2 module for the 223 bits, that'd be fine with me.


> Imho, the main method in JEXL itself should be a test class in the test
> package.

Yeah, OTOH, theres something to be said about having it in the jar
(specifically, ease of access). So, this one's for you and sebb to
discuss :-)

While we're at it, I see little value in the junit package.

-Rahul

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


Mime
View raw message