[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELOCITY-618?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12638176#action_12638176
]
Nathan Bubna commented on VELOCITY-618:
---------------------------------------
I wouldn't bet against you on developers' first reaction. But i'll have to
surprise you and cry foul over the inconsistency. :) I just don't feel we
need to go around adding special cases to an escaping system that is already
confusing. Really, i can appreciate your concern, but it feels wrong to me to
have a "strict reference mode" property change escaping rules for references.
I'm stretched enough by having "strict *reference* mode" be strict about
undefined macros as well.
If you really want to pursue configurability of escaping behavior, that's
probably best left for a different issue/patch/property.
I really don't think abc${D}xyz is all that onerous. i use that type of
escaping regularly.
> Strict property and method references
> -------------------------------------
>
> Key: VELOCITY-618
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELOCITY-618
> Project: Velocity
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Engine
> Reporter: Byron Foster
> Fix For: 1.5.1, 1.6
>
> Attachments: MacroAndVarEscape.patch,
> strictPropertyAndVariable_3.patch
>
>
> The given patch against trunk adds a new option 'runtime.references.strict'.
> When set to true, invalid property references will throw a
> InvalidMethodException. For example $foo.bar will throw an exception if the
> object contained in $foo has no such property as bar. Any kind of reference
> to bar will cause an exception including:
> #if(#foo.bar)
> #set($foo.bar = "junk")
> #set($foo.getBar())
> etc...
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
