I'm thinking of an approach to writing a DSL with a much cleaner syntax. I'll
try to put something together.
-
Marius Danciumarius.dan...@gmail.com wrote:
All,
I just want to see if there is any interest in the approach discussed here.
As you know Lift has
Looks like a neat approach.
It would be great if it was possible to get a better syntax though. It might
not be worth the effort or stable enough, but have you seen scala.reflect.Code?
scalac can compile code into an AST.
-
Marius
scala.reflect.Code (aka expression trees / AST manipulation) would actually
be great -- what was proposed was far from it, though.
As I understand it, this approach has not advanced in about 2 years. I'd be
happy to hear if it was a viable option, even if only on 2.8.
alex
On Sun, Dec 13,
All,
I just want to see if there is any interest in the approach discussed here.
As you know Lift has some interesting support for building JavaScript
constructs from Scala code usig JsExp, JsCmd etc classes. I used quite a lot
this support and it's great but if your JS code that you want to send
Hey Marius,
Within this DSL will you be using JsObj under the hood or lift-json?
I would be very reluctant about adding new things to lift that don't
unify our Js and JSON libs.
On this note, will this unification take place before 2.0?
Cheers, Tim
Sent from my iPhone
On 12 Dec 2009, at
Personally, I would rather go with a JavaScript literal and a simple
templating mechanism for substitution/binding of Javascript literals + Json
objects that would drive dynamic code (if conditionals, for-loops, ...).
Taking your example,
def myFunc = {
function myFunc( param1, param2 ) {
