[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JEXL-229?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16062958#comment-16062958
]
Henri Biestro commented on JEXL-229:
------------------------------------
A set of use cases is missing. However and in general, I suspect a new syntax
is not warranted.
Can you give produce an example/test using a classp(...) or typep(...)
function/functor in a namespace so what you're after is made clear?
> Introduce new syntax for class literals: Class<T> and Type<T>
> -------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: JEXL-229
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JEXL-229
> Project: Commons JEXL
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Affects Versions: 3.1
> Reporter: Dmitri Blinov
> Priority: Minor
>
> For the purpose of type checking in jexl, It whould be convenient to have
> some simple syntax for referring to class types, like Class<String> or
> Type<Boolean>. Literal Class<T> should refer to general classes, and literal
> Type<T> should refer to primitive type classes. For literals Class<T> it
> could be possible to specify partal class name, which should resolve to
> classes in basic packages like java.lang and java.util, for example.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
