alas, no
but the tools subproject has a RenderTool (and a ViewRenderTool if you use the
VelocityViewServlet) with which you can evaluate
strings
by the way, why should Velocity support -or not- indirection ?
The reason why it should not : it might break the Keep It Simple Stupid paradigm - so
some say. VTL would look like Perl, according
to them.
The reasons why it should be supported, IMO :
1. By language self-consistency : not having indirection is typically a constraint
that any developper wandering around with
Velocity will stumble over one day, after having tried it, thinking it will work.
2. Since you've got an easy workaround by mean of a tool, why not having it as part of
the syntax.
3. Should VTL allow indirection, templates are not gonna fill themselves with
ununderstandable $$ - I mean it will be a marginal -
but very practical - usage.
Just some thoughts.
CloD
----- Original Message -----
From: "J. B. Rainsberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: vendredi 14 novembre 2003 16:54
Subject: Double indirection impossible?
> Everyone:
>
> I was unable to find a definitive answer to this question in the
> documentation, so I'll ask here. I suspect this is a FAQ. I apologize.
>
> Does Velocity support double indirection? I mean evaluating a reference
> to a reference...
>
> ${${fieldName}}
>
> ...where the value of fieldName is a valid member of the current
> VelocityContext. Is there any way to achieve this? Without it, I have to
> give up some important refactorings, and I'd rather not.
>
> Thanks.
> --
> J. B. Rainsberger,
> Diaspar Software Services
> http://www.diasparsoftware.com :: +1 416 791-8603
> Let's write software that people understand
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
