There was some interest in this over the summer. Has that interest died? Has this patch just been forgotten about?
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35326 Michael On 6/10/05, Joe Germuska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 11:23 AM -0500 6/10/05, Michael Rasmussen wrote: > >I am working with a framework similar to chain at my day job. One of > >the nice features of the framework I work with is that all of the core > >'commands' support EL Evaluation when they take in values. This is > >something I would be interested in submitting a patch for if there is > >a hint of interest. > > There's more than a hint; I've been using JEXL extensively with chain > in my day job, and have made suggestions to the list before that it > could be useful. However, I am sensitive to the general sense that > dependencies should be added lightly. > > Specifically, situations where you use the actual Chain context > itself as the Expression evaluation context (or at least its basis) > make a lot of cool things possible. > > I'm about to leave for vacation for a week, but I think this is a > good general idea and would only want to see if other people have > strong feelings about the dependencies or the packaging. (One > suggestion was that chain could have a secondary distribution > artifact, something like ant-optional. Obviously that solves the > dependency question neatly, but it adds considerable management > overhead, and I simply haven't had time lately to set things up that > way.) > > Anyway, if it comes down to using an expression library, I'd argue > for JEXL over commons-el because JEXL supports method invocation, > which is incredibly handy. > > Joe > > -- > Joe Germuska > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://blog.germuska.com > "Narrow minds are weapons made for mass destruction" -The Ex > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]