Hi all I just now realized that BindingValueProviders indicate the names of script engines they want to provide values for - by means of the javax.script.name service property.
I wonder, whether this is not wrong ... The question becomes particularly interesting once a script engine can claim "compatibility" with another script engine to leverage that other script engine's BindingValueProvider services. I would think that BindingValueProvider services inject value bindings for particular script languages and not particular script interpreter implementations. For example a BindingValueProvider for JavaScript might provide bindings for JavaScript in general not for the Rhino implementation in particular. Hence the binding would rather be for the language than for the concrete script engine. Or am I completely on the wrong track ? Or might we want to support both ? Regards Felix
