Hi Jake,
On 19/04/2019 16.15, Jacob Beard wrote:
Hi Ate,
Thanks for your reply. I think I could help with these issues, and close the
gap for full compliance of the js language model.
That would be great and definitely appreciated.
But that said: I'm still worried if it actually is worth the effort.
Because: who is looking for or (still) waiting for js language
support in commons-scxml?
Community wise, there have been no concrete questions or requests
concerning the js language for many years.
And with the Nashorn engine now deprecated, the current implementation
is besides being incomplete, not sustainable in the long run anyway.
Of course we could consider adding support for GraalVM instead, but is
anyone really asking or waiting for that either?
We currently have pretty solid and SCXML compliant language support with
jexl and groovy, which might be good enough in practice for many, if not
all, of the community.
What I really dislike is further delaying the 2.0 release just because
of the incomplete js language support, and with a unclear idea if it
ever can/will be completed.
Although I personally would still vote +1 to remove js language support,
I also can agree to keep it for a while longer to allow others like you
to chime in and try completing.
But pending that uncertain outcome, I rather proceed with the 2.0
release ASAP anyway, explicitly stating the js language support is not
finished and to be considered alpha or beta.
I was wondering, did you have a timeline in mind for the 2.0 release? I should
start to free up in June/July.
I may be able to spend some cycles the coming month (May) to proceed
with the above idea and work towards a 2.0 release, independent of the
js language support status.
Once we have a 2.0 release out, we can (more) easily roll out newer
minor/patch releases thereafter for improved js language support if and
when we get that incorporated.
Regards,
Ate
Let me know what you think. Thank you,
Jake
On Apr 18, 2019, at 3:46 PM, Ate Douma <a...@douma.nu> wrote:
On 18/04/2019 18.00, Jacob Beard wrote:
Hi Ate,
On Apr 18, 2019, at 11:23 AM, Ate Douma <a...@douma.nu> wrote:
Only for the javascript language (using Java 8 Nashorn, now deprecated
since Java 11...) there are still 3/188 W3C IRP tests failing.
And those 3 test failures are really, really difficult to fix, because
of limitations/quirks in the Nashorn engine itself.
Could you please provide more information on this? Which tests are failing, and
what are the limitations and quirks of Nashorn that cause this?
Sure.
Regarding 'quirks': see issue SCXML-273 [1] which concerns the problem
that the Nashorn engine by default doesn't fail on referencing a missing
property. Which is tested by W3C IRP test 307.
Regarding limitations: there are two W3C IRP ecma test, 557 and 561,
which make use of XML DOM APIs in a condition, like:
cond="var1.getElementsByTagName('book')[0].getAttribute('title') == 'title1'"
However Nashorn doesn't provide default/native XML DOM support, and
adding that would be (at least from my perspective) quite an effort, if
even properly doable.
That doesn't feel like worth the effort, with little added value/ROI.
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SCXML-273
Thank you,
Jake
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: user-h...@commons.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
