On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 08:26:54 -0800, Nathan Bubna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 13:58:04 -0000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > Author: marino > > Date: Fri Feb 25 05:58:01 2005 > > New Revision: 155328 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewcvs?view=rev&rev=155328 > > Log: > > obviously a very useful generic tool ... thanks Claude! > > > > Added: > > > > jakarta/velocity-tools/trunk/src/java/org/apache/velocity/tools/view/tools/BrowserSnifferTool.java > > hmm. ok, so i've been holding off a bit on this tool (and EscapeTool > and ArrayTool) for an opportunity to discuss them. i don't really > have a lot of time for that at the moment (i'll be out most of the > weekend), but now is apparently the time. so, i suppose i may as well > pose the questions and see what people say... > > BrowserSnifferTool: > this is my least favorite of the three. the biggest reason being that > it uses Java 1.4's regex stuff, which means we're now dependent on > Java 1.4. on one level, i'm ok with that. after all, there is a > newer version of java out, and 1.4 has a lot of good stuff. the > problem i see is that Velocity itself has not yet required users to > move to 1.4. this bothers me quite a bit, enough, in fact, that i > think we need to retract this tool and put it in the wiki for now. > but i don't just want to veto it without some discussion. > > EscapeTool: > my only hesitation here is also due to dependencies. i'm not thrilled > about adding commons-lang as a dep for just this tool. especially > when you could actually just put an instance of StringEscapeUtils into > the context. but i do see the use in having a simplified interface to > it along with a few other useful little things. and this tool does > appear to be well-used by people. so what do ya'll think? is it > worth another dependency? if most people are in favor of it, i'm ok > with adding it for 1.2.
nevermind my comments on this one. as i'm wading thru my morning email i hadn't yet noticed that Marino's already committed this one. for this tool, that's good enough for me to support it. > ArrayTool: > this can be very useful and doesn't add any dependencies. however, > its functionality is stuff on my wishlist for the core. and deep > down, i fear that adding it to Tools will lower the likelihood someone > will get enough of an "itch" to patch the core. (and by all that, i > mean making arrays and Lists indistinguishable to a template author). > hmm. i wonder if that means we should make the ArrayTool > transparently handle Lists and arrays the same, as a kind of > demonstration for what the core should do (albeit with different > syntax). anyway, i've pretty much decided i would add this tool, i > just haven't gotten around to it. :) > > ok folks, give me some feedback, will ya? :) > > nathan > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
