Quoting Ray Cromwell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> > Ray, you continue to labour under the mistaken impression that WebMacro
> > script language is intended to be a general purpose programming language.
>
> I never asserted that, I asserted that there should be some minimal
> expression functionality.
OK. But all of your criticisms amount to that. You find features
that you would expect a programming language to have, and you
complain that WM script doesn't have them. At one point you even
compared WM's limitations to TCL's, as though WM script were trying
to be as general purpose as TCL! At another point you made reference
to lisp. And so on.
WM's script language is a rendering engine, not a programming language.
Your only major claim now is that WM templates aren't parameterizable
in a way that you like. Essentially you claim that the mechanism WM
provides isn't good enough to deal with insane amounts of complexity,
and therefore isn't good enough for everyday use either. It hasn't yet
occurred to you that there are lots and lots of people using WM now,
building parameterized templates without noticing this problem you
describe.
Yes, you can reach a level of complexity where the parameterization in
WM won't be adequate. It's rare, but you can contrive situations where
it becomes an issue. This is why #filter is in development now. It will
allow you to pass parameters down to sub-templates without passing
the entire context. You can actually do that now as well, though
the syntax a little unpleasant:
#set $template = $Broker.template.subtemplate.Value
$template.evaluate($parameter)
I find that somewhat ugly, but in the rare cases where these things
become an issue, you can do that. Once #filter is present you won't
have to resort to this anymore.
There are some rough edges in WM still, but since you haven't really
ever used it, you are not even close to guessing what they are.
At any rate, nothing I say will ever satisfy you. You are not really
interested in a technical discussion. You are interseted in a flame war.
I am not.
> In reality, WebMacro is a tool like every other. It is not
> a revolution, not innovative, and your ideas are not new to any
> experienced designer.
No argument from me here. There is only one big innovation in
WebMacro, and that is to take two good ideas and mix them together.
I didn't build WebMacro to start a revolution--I built it to get
work done.
When I started developing Java servlets I had already been using
templates for years. When I discovered that, at that time, there were
no template systems available for Java, I wrote one. I never claimed
this was revolutionary--I was just bringing a standard, time-tested
methodology to a new web development platform.
WebMacro's only real innovation is to combine this design methodology
with Java's powerful ability to introspect and analyze classes. Other
template systems, such as FreeMarker, require you to build up models
of your back end data using a variety of adapters.
You have been so busy looking at WM's script language, obsessing over
whether it is a programming language, that you have completely missed
the point. WebMacro's power lies largely in its introspection engine
which goes far beyond the analysis performed on Java beans. This is
what permits the script language to be so simple, without requiring
any additional work on the part of the back-end programmer.
Introspective techniques had already been successfully and interestingly
used in a lot of other technologies by then, so all I did is borrow a
good idea from these other projects and combine it with a tried and true
method of developing websites.
Sorry if this isn't the fiery revolutionary rhetoric you were trying
to put into my mouth.
> But just as many people think XML is nice, and JSP taglibs
> in Jakarta/Tomcat will be nice, and sometimes, just sometimes,
> people need to get something done quickly, and are going
> to hack it up in Model1/Scriptlets, and then refactor it into
> Model2 later. That's reality.
I really like XSLT. I find it a very effective technique for some kinds
of websites. I find it very clumsy for others. I really don't see it as
a competitor to WebMacro at all, since I believe WM's strengths lie
precisely where XSLT is weak. I think they're complimentary technologies,
and plan to integrate XSLT into WebMacro soon.
At any rate, Ray, I am really trying to end this thread. You keep posting
inflammatory stuff, and I keep wanting to respond to it, but I think
this thread should die.
I don't think you are interested in taking an honest look at WebMacro,
so I suspect I am wasting your time here.
Justin
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe: mailto [EMAIL PROTECTED] with body: "signoff JSP-INTEREST".
FAQs on JSP can be found at:
http://java.sun.com/products/jsp/faq.html
http://www.esperanto.org.nz/jsp/jspfaq.html
