Am Mo, den 29.03.2004 schrieb Sylvain Wallez um 19:05: > jflow isn't good as it doesn't allow the distinction between JS and Java.
Okay, seems that we agree on "javaflow". > Now what should go in that block: the _flow_ implementations, or the > class enhancer? I would stay that only the flow implementation has its > place inside Cocoon's CVS. But finding a more suitable place for the > enhancer (BCEL, jakarta-commons, codehaus?) may take some time, and we > may temporarily host in in the javaflow block. Yes, we have already talked with james strachan. And he seems to be interested too. But for the first time I would start within Cocoon. > Now about whether Cocoon should have two flow implementations, I think > that this is a very special case where it makes sense, as it touches the > programming language area, where Cocoon brings nothing new to the > picture (except of course continuations), and therefore has to consider > people's habits. Convincing people that flow is a good thing is rather > easy (considering the number of Wows!), but selling a particular > programming language (as opposed to some XML dialect) is sometimes > difficult. Some people will love JS and be frightened by Java, and some > others won't consider writing code using a language other than Java. > > That's why I think both implementations have their place in Cocoon. > > Ah, and would it be possible to use the class enhancer to enable > continuations in a compiled (as in ".class") JS script? This may help us > solving the current Rhino issues. I think all java classes are capsulated in wrapper classes, and if these classes suppport the continuation, then it should work. Okay, then I start to commit the block. Stephan.
