commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Biestro <>
Subject Release JEXL 3.0 based on RC1
Date Tue, 29 Nov 2011 17:00:16 GMT
Dear all, 

JEXL 3.0 is ready for review. 

The 2.1 attempt comments have been folded in; JEXL 3 being binary and source code incompatible
with JEXL 2, the code has moved to the new o.a.c.jexl3 package.
I've also moved some classes to the internal packages to make the public API clearer for the

Here is a quick list of new features (from the release notes): 

What's new in 3.0:
* A more thorough arithmetic (JexlArithmetic) that allows fine control over decimals (scale
and precision), a 
  new syntax for numeric literals (OGNL inspired Big and Huge notations) and a better type
handling keeping the most 
  appropriate representation in casual operations. 
* The introduction of script variables and parameters that reduce context dependencies and
methods; this allows to 
  perform checks after script creation (light static checking hints). Plus the ability to
call script from scripts. 
* A sandoxing feature to restrict and rename what JEXL can access from the environment allowing
tighter control over security. 
* Extensions to UnifiedJEXL that allow the creation of templates. 

New features in 3.0: 
* JEXL-114:     Allow scripts to create local variables // Add return keyword 
* JEXL-113:     Add functions to extract which variables, parameters and local variables are
used to evaluate a script 
* JEXL-118:     Provide an IN operator 
* JEXL-115:     Add support for asynchronous script execution and cancellation 
* JEXL-116:     Add control over classes, methods, constructors and properties allowed in
* JEXL-120:     Add simple template features 
* JEXL-119:     Allow indexed properties container resolution in expressions 

Tested against Java 1.{5,6} / Maven{2,3}, Windows 7/Linux/Mac OS. 




This vote will close in 72 hours, 08:00PM GMT, Dec 3rd. 

  [ ] +1 Release these artifacts 
  [ ] +0 OK, but... 
  [ ] -0 OK, but really should fix... 
  [ ] -1 I oppose this release because... 

Many thanks, 
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message