I don't know how relevant it is to the conversation or how awful it's going to be trying to do it but I did plan on taking a stab at creating a new unified-el compatible grammar for OGNL when I do my big IoC-friendly re-factor. (probably a 2.7.3 release kind of change)
Since jboss and others already sound like they do some el extensions of their own to support parameter passing / other things it hopefully won't be too bad. I'll try and post updates wherever I can to get more people involved but knowing how you want to handle backwards compatibility -> unified el + ognl stuff (if at all) and if OGNL needs to perform any extra tricks to make it happen would be a good thing to have ready and discuss / etc during that dev cycle. I'm guessing I'll probably start on it sometime this month and finish "whenever". . Tom Schneider wrote: > > I was working on a proof of concept for Unified EL: > http://cwiki.apache.org/S2PLUGINS/unified-el-plugin.html > > I had a basic value stack up and running, however, I never took it any > farther than that. Richard Burton is planning on implemented an MVEL > stack in the near future, but he's waiting on some changes from Chris > Brock in MVEL itself. > > I think in the long run, we really need a new tag library to fully take > advantage of the unfied EL. Even if we do that though, standard unified > EL is not as powerful as OGNL. We would need to extend the language or > be limited when compared to what is possible with OGNL today. Maybe for > some people that's not an issue, but I fear that would keep some people > from switching. > Tom > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/JSP-EL-in-struts2-tags-tf4902129.html#a14137925 Sent from the Struts - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
