Adrian, thank you for your work. What I was writing was actually an extension to Groovy for making it OFBiz friendly; now we have a "reusable" (? by other languages) version of it... my guess is that you did it because you liked the ideas in it (and I appreciate it) and you thought it was useful for other languages as well; and you may be right about this even if, as I initially mentioned, I would have preferred to complete my work, or at least add a bit more to it, test the DSL with more poc and Minilang-->Groovy conversions before crystallizing it into an interface (one of the advantages in doing it in Groovy was that I could implement it without the need to build/restart the system)... now I have an interface and an implementation of it to take care of. But I don't want to complain (*) and I will review your work closely and see what I can do to use it properly in Groovy. This refactoring has introduced a series of limitations that I am determined to resolve and it will require some more study around Groovy and ideas to cope with them... I really want that, if we will ever adopt Groovy as our next language for the applications, it will look as perfect and simple and natural and integrated as possible: the natural language for OFBiz (like Minilang is now) rather than OFBiz implemented in Groovy.
But before I proceed: what is the next step in your plan? What should go in the ScriptHelper interface? Am I allowed to enhance it based on my discoveries in my poc work (Minilang-->Groovy) or should I consider it a final interface that doesn't have to be modified? Should I ask before enhancing it? I don't want to hijack your work. And more importantly: can I assume that this helper class will stay light and simple? I really don't want to see it transformed into a huge class containing a big amount of methods from different APIs... the fact that all languages will potentially use it and may wish to extend it with util methods that make sense to them concerns me a little bit (for example, a language with weak support for Map handling may need utils methods to manage Maps that could be useless for Groovy). Kind regards and again thank you, Jacopo (*) even if I find a bit annoying to see my work intercepted and re-routed while I was in the middle of it, I also appreciate the time and effort you spent on it and I really want to accept the fact that working in a community means that I have to blend and negotiate my own ideas and plans with the ones from others: sometimes it means that you get great help, sometimes it means that your own beautiful and perfect ideas are touched and rearranged to fit other's plans and other's beautiful ideas. I hope that the good attitude and flexibility I am trying to apply here will be also used by you and others when it will be time for you to accept other's proposals/changes On Mar 13, 2012, at 12:35 AM, Adrian Crum wrote: > Jacopo, > > I committed a generic, reusable version of this idea in rev 1299924. > > -Adrian > > On 3/8/2012 6:02 PM, Jacopo Cappellato wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I have just completed my first pass in the implementation of a DSL (Domain >> Specific Language) for OFBiz that can be used by Groovy services to act like >> a modern version of Minilang. >> >> Please review my notes here: >> >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Groovy+Services+and+DSL+for+OFBiz >> >> I look forward to your comments and feedback but please consider that 1) it >> is a work in progress, 2) I spent a lot of time and mental energy in the >> effort (reaching simplicity is really complex task!)... so please don't be >> too picky :-) >> >> Regards, >> >> Jacopo >> >> PS: if you find it useful, I can commit the Groovy service mentioned in the >> page in Confluence
