If someone can open a jira issue for this
I’ll be sure to get this in to xwork beta 2.
-----Original Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003
10:01 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RES: [OS-webwork] that
keyword...
I agree that using 'that' looks a lot like something
from JSR 666 :)
+1 for 'top' (t would be too cryptic for me)
peace,
-cv
-----Mensagem original-----
De: Patrick Lightbody [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Enviada em: segunda-feira, 20 de
outubro de 2003 12:58
Para:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Assunto: RE: [OS-webwork] that
keyword...
Since "that" hasn't gone in to a real
release, I'm totally happy to
change the name. Top or t will
probably be what I go with.
-----Original Message-----
From:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
On Behalf Of
Robert Dawson
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2003 1:50
PM
To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [OS-webwork] that
keyword...
I am sorry to bring up what must be a topic people are
sick of by
now....
but why "that" for the
top of the value stack --
there are other words that would be better.
"that" sounds like a bad
joke.
how about "top"
"stackTop"
or something similar. (even better would be a 1 character
keyword).
I understand that this might break some code, but the
"that" keyword
seems
so wrong. The people I have
talked to about it seem to either think
that
the "that" keyword is
either a bad joke or when talking about someone is
refering to something else.
ie that is how you do it -- I have seen
alot of
"interesting" changes
made between webwork 1 and 2 and would find that
the
_expression_ language change to OGNL
one of the more frustrating.
I can understand that the webwork 1 _expression_
language didn't always
follow
what Ruby people love to call the
"principal of least suprise", a good
quality for any API, but as a
general rule, it was good at working with
a
ValueStack. OGNL seems to be
a good object navigation language, but I
don't
think that the value stack
interaction is right. Treating the stack as
an
array in OGNL feels wrong to me. I
know that the use of "." for the top
of
the stack doesn't make sense with
OGNL, but would love it if one of the
smart people out there could come
up with something that did.
I apolagise for the length of that and the ranty
nature of the e-mail.
WebWork 1 is a great framework,
WebWork2 adds some nice features, and I
want
the best for it (honest :)).
Rob
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus
Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.522 / Virus Database:
320 - Release Date: 29/09/2003
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email sponsored by:
Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo
The Event For Linux Datacenter
Solutions & Strategies in The Enterprise
Linux in the Boardroom; in the
Front Office; & in the Server Room
http://www.enterpriselinuxforum.com
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email sponsored by:
Enterprise Linux Forum Conference & Expo
The Event For Linux Datacenter
Solutions & Strategies in The Enterprise
Linux in the Boardroom; in the
Front Office; & in the Server Room
http://www.enterpriselinuxforum.com
_______________________________________________
Opensymphony-webwork mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensymphony-webwork
