Sounds like a good addition.
"Daniel F. Savarese" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 17/05/2004 05:17:23 AM:
>
> I've been experimenting with Jelly Swing recently after finding Groovy
> Swing problematic, trying to see whether it will make GUI prototyping
> faster. I may have missed it, but I couldn't find a tag in any of the
> tag libraries to access a static class field. There's invokeStatic
> for invoking static methods. For the project I'm working on, I
> wrote a GetStaticTag that works like this:
>
> <v:getStatic var="closeOperation" className="javax.swing.JFrame"
> field="EXIT_ON_CLOSE"/>
>
> That allowed me to then do:
>
> <frame title="Tree Frame" var="frame" size="400,400"
> defaultCloseOperation="${closeOperation}">
> ...
> </frame>
>
> I think it's pretty important to be able to access static fields
> and that a getStatic (or some other name) tag would be useful to have
> in the core tag library. If I convert my GetStaticTag class code to
> the style convention used in the Jelly source and add a Jelly test
> for it, is it all right for me to add it to the source tree? I've
> appended the simple class at the end of this message. I guess the
> question is a two-parter:
> 1. Does the Jelly core tag library need a getStatic tag to complement
> getStatic?
>
> [ ] +1 Yes, it's generally useful.
> [ ] -1 No, it's easy for someone who needs it to make their own
tag.
+1.
>
> 2. May I commit code for the tag to the repository assuming I convert
> it to the proper style and provide a Jelly test?
>
> [ ] +1 Go right ahead, we can tweak the code after it's committed.
> [ ] -1 No, we need to agree on what to call the tag, you should
> try more than one class loader in doTag, some other reason
...
+1.
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
