On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Anca Luca <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> a bit late to the party, I just found out today that $msg.get is now
> deprecated.
>
>
> On 03/15/2013 01:45 PM, Vincent Massol wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mar 15, 2013, at 1:21 PM, Eduard Moraru<[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Are we sure we want to drop the $msg binding in the future [1]?
>>
>> IMO yes, for consistency, but it's a good question to ask. It's not just
>> about $msg but about all bindings. If we allow "shortcut aliases for
>> bindings" we need to make this general and allow any services binding to
>> offer shortcuts.
>
>
> Well... it's complicated. We would also remove $xwiki in the future? maybe
> $xcontext as well? it will all be prefixed with $services?
Of course we want to remove $xwiki and $xcontext, first because we
want to get rid of XWikiContext/Context and stop use that crappy all
in one XWiki class and second because yes we want to go trough
services.
The main use cases remaining for theses two bindings should be covered
by a script service coming with the new model.
>
> I think that while it's a good idea for code beauty reasons, it's highly
> impractical. Script authors are already used with $msg.get(), the new
> $services.localization.render() does at least the same thing as $msg.get (or
> doesn't it?), it's longer to write **and to read** ("services" itself is
> longer than "msg.get" so no matter what you put after, it's already longer)
> , and it will generate tons and tons and tons and tons and tons (I cannot
> emphasize this enough) of logs saying that script X is using a deprecated
> function, until you change all your scripts and all the extensions on
> extensions.xwiki.org so that when you install something your logs are still
> readable (or maybe we can disable these logs?)
>
>
>>
>> One reason we introduced $services was to keep the xcontext namespace free
>> for applications to use.
>>
>>> Compared to other services, $services.localization would be used heavily
>>
>> I had personally proposed "l10n" to make it a bit shorter but it wasn't
>> accepted. My proposal was: $services.l10n
>>
>>> inside scripts and we would basically have 2 options:
>>> 1. use $services.localization.render('key') (you fall asleep writing this
>>> every time)
>>> 2. always declare a variable in your script like #set ($keys =
>>> $services.localization) and then do $keys.render('key')
>>
>> 3. Use the translation macro if you're in wiki pages: {{translation
>> key="…"/}}
>
>
> This is, imho, a little quarter of a solution. In practice, html macro with
> wiki=false is used far more than we'd like.
> Now, sure, we can choose to ignore that, but that would be another
> discussion.
>
> Also, the problem of all 3 solutions above is that they require refactoring
> of a lot of code (I for one use a lot the localization tool, not only for
> localization, but also to make it easy for people that don't know code to
> decide what the interface of the application should say).
>
>
>>
>>> AFAIK, we have already considered in the past that a similarly used
>>> service
>>> like $services.model is already becoming a bit annoying having to write
>>> the
>>> oh-so-very-long "$services.model.createDocumentReference(wiki,
>>> space,name)"; do we want to get the same effect with the new localization
>>> module?
>>
>> @Edy, we really need to commit the auto completion feature ;)
>>
>>> I understand and agree that the new localization module is more powerful
>>> and flexible than the XWikiMessageTool, but I feel that those new
>>> features
>>> are not required in day to day use and unnecessarily crowd/pollute the
>>> regularly used API.
>>
>> You're loosing me here. I thought you were only talking about the binding
>> name and here you start to say that you want to go back to XWikiMessageTool?
>>
>>> This transition should IMO be smoother
>>
>> Smoother than what?
>
>
> I think what Edi means, and I agree with him, is that he doesn't really
> understand why can't we just have the old $msg.get function call the new
> localization service and be done with it?
>
>
>>
>>> and with less impact than what is
>>> currently being proposed. If the new localization module can provide all
>>> the features of the XWikiMessageTool, then I propose that we simply reuse
>>> the $msg binding as it is and, in the background, transform
>>> XWikiMessageTool into a facade (as I see we have already pretty much done
>>> to preserve backwards compatibility), but agree that we *keep* $msg as
>>> the
>>> simplified translations binding, to be used in day to day operations and,
>>> for more complex tasks, the dev needs to use $services.localization
>>> instead.
>>
>> I don't understand what you mean. If your idea is to get $msg.get() rather
>> than $msg.render() which is the new API then I don't agree. If what you
>> propose is just to have a generic "script service alias" notion where $msg
>> would be the same as $services.localization then I'm more inclined to think
>> about it :)
>
>
> See above.
>
>
>>
>> BTW I would not want to reuse the same name ($msg) because it's
>> misleading.
>
>
> Why would that be misleading? Isn't the new localization service an
> improvement of the old one? It's a new tool?
> Since I contribute less and less, I am now more a user of the xwiki platform
> than a developer of it, and honestly, as a user, I perceive the work that
> was done on localization as an improvement of what was there before and I
> don't like the idea that for an improvement of the platform I use I need to
> rewrite all my code, and use a new, longer, function call, and learn new
> function names et all: as a script author, I'm actually doing the same thing
> but now I shuld change my whole code to do the same thing in a different
> way, because the platform was improved.
>
>>
>>> Basically, I`m proposing to apply the KIS(s) principle. :)
>>
>> Another option is to not change anything at the level of java (i.e. no
>> "script service alias") but in xwikivars.vm add a velocity variable named
>> $l10n:
>> #set ($l10n = $services.localization)
>
>
> if that set could be
> #set($msg.get = $services.localization.render)
> then sure, I agree with this solution.
>
> Thanks,
> Anca
>
>
>>
>> This is basically your option 2) above but made generic by putting it in
>> xwikivars.vm.
>>
>> Thanks
>> -Vincent
>>
>>> WDYT?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Eduard
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> devs mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> devs mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
