The advantage is to allow applications which use BSF to use Jelly without needing to code directly to the Jelly engine.

Sincerely,
Anthony Eden

Paul Libbrecht wrote:

On Dimanche, juil 13, 2003, at 15:33 Europe/Paris, Laird J. Nelson wrote:


I'm not entirely sure of the ground I'm standing on here, but what would
it take to make Jelly a BSF-compliant scripting language?  Is that a
meaningful question?


Looks very decent to me.
What's more in a bsf connection than connecting some context and providing bean access ?


The thing is, jelly already does behave in this way (addressing bean-properties by names at least)... so what would be the advantage ?
The startup/packaging ? (this is where, indeed, to me, jelly is a bit painful)


Paul


--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]



Reply via email to