Le mardi 29 mai 2007 à 12:16 -0700, Will Glass-Husain a écrit : > Hi, > > Oh, definitely, we should target our next release, version 1.6. And we > should aim for JDK 1.4 compile-time / JDK 1.3 run-time compatibility. No > reason to change that.
There could some reasons to require java 1.5, like the java.lang.Iterable interface for instance, which would greatly ease the process of making a custom class ready for the #foreach directive (only one method to implement against more than a dozen today to comply to the Collection interface). One good compromise would be to have the uberspector only search for an "iterator()" method, without caring about interfaces. Otherwise there is no real urgency to require 1.5, I agree. > Is there a need to change the macro definition syntax? The other issues > seem more urgent. (and all backwards compatible). Backward compatible, yes, but only by means of configuration flags like 'velocimacro.blankSeparators=false'. But since this flag changes the behaviour of the parser, the way to go IMO would be to make the parser pluggable (Henning already talked also about this). Doing this would also allow us to integrate other non-BC changes like disallowing the minus character in reference names (see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELOCITY-542 ), or allowing expressions as macro arguments, in the same new parser, and to reduce the control of all those new features to only one runtime flag. > I think Henning was referring to the *use* of the macros, not the definition > (is that right?). And we added commas as a delimiter for 1.5. Maybe Henning didn't intend it but it wasn't my point :-) If this new syntax is not too hard to implement in the parser we should IMHO go for it as it is the most natural. Urgency or priority wasn't my point, I should have started a new thread. So what I'd like is to include this feature (support both creation syntaxes) in the roadmap (maybe targetted for 1.6 with a new plugable parser, for 2.0 otherwise), as the new syntax clearly responds to the principle of least surprise (velocity is the only language I know that uses the old syntax). Claude --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
