Can you be more precise on the expectactions for the JSTL compatibility ? I can't say this is my favourite goal for jelly...
Clearly, the need to j:set is a pain... but there are many many other ways around... (remember jelly is flexible!):
1.- the forEachToken tag that I described here
2.- have a function like "tokenize" within jexl
3.- be able to declare functions within jexl (see the proposal of Ernesto Reinaldo recently, this seems to be also JSP inspired)
I would favour 1 for best predictability and confort (I think being able to state a tokenizer with any whitespace is really missing thus far).
I would favour 2. to be quick and compatible with 3. which, to my taste, has the power of shortening by 50% half of the jelly scripts around.
Paul
On 16-Dec-03, at 10:40 Uhr, J�rg Schaible wrote:
Paul Libbrecht wrote on Tuesday, December 16, 2003 10:01 AM:
To all that execpt core:forEach to accept such things as a
string-with-separator, dare I suggest a work is done on a
separate tag
than forEach ?
I do think forEach makes sense with collections and I do
believe it is kind of sad to expect a collection out of a... string-object... so I would really prefer having something like core:forEachTokens with good attributes like the token-list, wether to go through tokens... and possibly with other attributes like token-family names (e.g. any whitespace, any character, any capital, as java.lang.Character offers).
It is the way it is specified in JSTL (1.0, chapter 6.1.1) anf therefore something that is expected to work in this way. Admited, it is a convenience enhancement, but looking at Jelly it is really much more fun to write:
<j:foreach var="i" items="a,b,c"> <echo>${i}</echo> </j:forEach>
than to introduce everytime an additional variable for nothing:
<u:tokenize var="i.split" delim=",">a,b,c</:u:tokenize> <j:foreach var="i" items="${item.split}"> <echo>${i}</echo> </j:forEach>
especially since you often have comma-separated elements reading from a property file.
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ViewIssue.jspa?key=JELLY-98 Already implements this including a test case.
Regards, J�rg
--------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]
