--- Glenn Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is no need for all this complexity to generate
> a package name
> in the new Jasper.
Hmmm... compared to the gobbledy-gook that was being
done before, I'd hardly call what I did complex.
Aside from options, all it does is very simply asign
the JSP page a package name based on it's directory
hierarchy and place the .java and .class files in same
- this is consistant with strict java naming
convention.
The way jasper now loads jsp
> pages, each page is
> completely isolated from all other pages. Every jsp
> page compiled
> could be a class named "org.apache.jsp.MyJSP"
> without
> any concern whatsoever about conflicts because each
> individual page
> has its own class loader.
Ah, I see, you avoid file-level conflicts by placing
the generated code into separate directory paths, even
though the package names (currently) do not reflect
the directory locations. Yup, that should work,
although i wouldn't say it is any less complex and I
don't think it is consistent with standard java
package/directory naming conventions.
> The new jasper makes it very easy to find and view
> the java source for
> a translated jsp page, it is located in
> work/somehost/someapp/some/context/path/MyJSP.java.
>
Does it not seem logical to assign a package to the
MyJSP class based on all or part of the above path?
This may seem like esthetics, I suppose. Not
something we should get stressed about.
What you've done is a great improvement over what was
there. Does it work with tc 3.3?
Mel
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - Buy the things you want at great prices.
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
