On Sat, 5 Jun 2004, Gianugo Rabellino wrote: > > On Jun 5, 2004, at 7:19 PM, Antonio Gallardo wrote: > > > Hi: > > > > After 11 hours of work, the first implementation of a Groovy Flow > > engine > > for Cocoon is working on my hard drive.
Great work, Antonio! Perhaps you can send me a copy. > Cool! But. gosh, I hate to rain on anyone's parade, yet I think it was > kinda decided yesterday to focus on solidifying JS instead than Groovy. > Don't get me wrong, I like Groovy a lot and I sure appreciate your > work, yet I have this feeling that committing it now would just confuse > users even more. Flow is already feeling like quicksand, adding yet > another language without being able to guarantee solid contracts is > risky business. I'd much rather see a bulletproof JS/Java foundation > before delving into a partially working Groovy implementation. So, this > is a sad -0 here. I played yesterday with the javascript compiler around, but this didn't solve the problem to run rhino ontop of javaflow. So, there almost no advantage using the javascript compiler. Another idea is to replace the root classloader by the continuation class loader, and instrument all rhino classes. The problem is how to configure the class loader. You can't use the cocoon.xconf, because you need already the CL for the root container. And using the servlet configuation file isn't a good idea. Then we have also a dependency to javaflow, which isn't any longer optional. Maybe somebody had an idea... Stephan.
