[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Remy Maucherat wrote: > > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>>There are few bugs in jspc, mostly related with the generation of the >>>class name and the mangling. >> >>Ooops, sorry, I thought I got it right. At least for the examples >>webapp, it did appear to work good. It is quite hard to un-spaghetti the >>code without beaking anything :-( What is the problem exactly ? (or >>maybe you fixed it already, in which case, just commit the fix :)) > > > Well, the spaghetti is the problem :-) > > Yes, I fixed it - but I'm afraid I fixed it too much ( i.e. instead > of just fixing the bug I cut the spaghetti a bit ), and that's > why I'm asking for permission :-)
Sure, no problem. JspC has historically been the most broken feature in Jasper. So I don't think it can get mush worse ;-) >>+1. I thought about doing it myself ;-) >> >>The goal eventually is to remove the need for having two different >>context classes. > > > Great. It is actually easy to merge all 3 - by using the > JspCServletContext ( the only part that's different > is the getResource(), etc ). I'll do that. +1. > Now the next problem - in the process I did few changes to JspC > to make it also work as an ant task ( i.e. added setters and I'm > in process of un-spaghetti-ing the main method ). I was thinking > to check it in as JspC2. > > The issue is that JspC2 may loose some of the options - > I think it's more important to get consistent and predictible > behavior, and I'm lost in how some options may work togheter. Great idea, but I don't see a lot worth keeping in the old one if the new one actually works (less options, but which actually work = good). So I would remove the old one. If there's a need, we can always resurrect it from CVS. Remy -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
