Sylvain Wallez wrote:...And also the other way around: BeanShell would allow people who are reluctant to using server-side JS to use the familiar Java syntax. But once again, the first requirement is to have continuation support.
I think there still some misunderstanding; BeanShell does not provide continuations and is not suited for running as a flowscript language like the Rhino JS (with its continuation support) does - here we agree. But thats not the point of Bertrand, as beanShell can turn a script into a Java object which in turn can be used in a typical, today JS flowscript.
That's what I meant.
..Instead of an object of a Java class Foo being hardcoded (and supposedly feared by hardcore scripters due to compilation/packaging requirements), it would result into something along the lines of
var foo = BeanShell.newObjectFromScript("myScriptedBusinessLogic.bs");
cocoon.setupObject(foo);
foo.doIt("blah"); ...
Exactly: allowing BeanShell (or any BSF) scripts could be used not only for Generators and Actions (as the BSF block currently does), but for scriptable business logic (and why not transformers or serializers by the way).
In this context, BSF scripts do not need any continuation support, they're used as java objects would be.
Depending on how you look at it, it might open wide avenues or a can of worms ;-)
But being able to prototype business logic in interpreted java code would be a big plus IMHO. Not to mention a great teaching tool.
-Bertrand
