Rico Jansen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>    Michiel Meeuwissen wrote:
> 
>    > Daniel proposes an implementaiton based on an XML, which simply states
>    all
>    > classes and methods which must be accessible, grouped by 'sets'.
>    >
>    Ok.
> 
>    >
>    > I don't actually understand this point. When using reflection to
>    'define' a
>    > function, there might be more methods with the same name. The above
>    > mentioned implementation simply gives an error if there is more than one
>    > with the given name.
>    >
>    > But probably that is not what you meant?
> 
>    What I actually meant is nesting, will that be supported ?
>    Like html(substring(field,0,5)).


Acutally, the hack is not about this. Of course nesting is supported if you
use the result of your function as a parameter of another, just like in
java.

I think nesting is now supported when you specify the function as one string
as you exampled. In that, nothing will change (though perhaps we like to
define substring as a function with 3 arguments: string, int, int. btw: a
backwards-compatibility arrangment will be added so make sure that it will
keep working as it did before if you don't define it at all; this is the
background of the 'AutodefiningParameters' class which is in speeltuin) 

If this feature by chance is broken than that is another issue which I would
be glad to look into though.

If nesting functions would actually be convenient when using functions-tag I
don't know. Good that you pointed that out, so I will not forget to try if
that is feasible.

 Michiel


-- 
Michiel Meeuwissen 
Mediapark C101 Hilversum  
+31 (0)35 6772979
nl_NL eo_XX en_US
mihxil'
 [] ()

Reply via email to