On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 2:36 AM, Claude Brisson <[email protected]> wrote: >> I don't know if the script context itself is to be present in the >> bindings (i.e. in the Velocity context). If so, we should name it >> $scriptContext rather than $context, since we already use the later >> for exposing a Velocity context to itself via the ContextTool. > > Update: I read in the specs that: > > << In all cases, the ScriptContext used during a script execution must > be a value in the Engine Scope of the ScriptEngine whose key is the > String “context”. >> > > There are several other keys which are to be defined: argv, filename, > engine, engine_version, language, language_version (all of which are > optional, but could be useful). > > My proposal is to gather all those keys in a $script object (that is, > to expose the Bindings in itself under the 'script' key). From what I > read in the specs, we are free to prefix predefined keys with whatever > we want.
+1 > The motivation is to: > - avoid potential naming collisions. The ContextTool, exposing the > Velocity context itself under the $context key, will not necessarily > be present, or can be under a different key, but better prevent than > cure. > - follow our current philosophy to gather properties in a control > object, as we already do for macros, loops, ... > > > Claude > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
