On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 10:50:54AM -0700, Nathan Stults wrote:
>
> (...)
> do you have any thoughts on a clean way to inject some context into
> ruote's expression evaluation process? It seems to be the one part of
> ruote that isn't designed specifically for extensibility. What I'd like
> to do is have some influence over the class that is in scope when ruby
> functions are evaluated, so that I can handle method missing and write
> expressions (similar to your little expression language) like this:
>
> _if "${r:consent_form_on_file == yes and is_patient_eligible}
>
> Instead of
>
> _if "${r:wi.fields['consent_form_on_file'] == 'yes' &&
> wi.fields['is_patient_eligible'] }" do
>
> With liberal use of method missing I can try to resolve unknown symbols
> from fields, variables or domain specific constants, and turn the rest
> into simple strings. I may very well be able to monkey patch this in,
> which is fine, but I wonder if there is any value in having expression
> evaluation in general be an official extensibility point, like parsing
> and storage and things, or of there is already a natural way of
> accomplishing this that I'm not seeing.
Hello Nathan,
I have to say I like your ideas.
Do you mind if I lift them and integrate them into ruote ?
a) more concise ruby
> _if "${r:consent_form_on_file == yes and is_patient_eligible} do
this looks great and is easily doable, while keeping backward compatibility
with the classical
> _if "${r:wi.fields['consent_form_on_file'] == 'yes' &&
> wi.fields['is_patient_eligible'] }" do
b) ruby evaluation as an extensibility point
Makes sense as well, I will work on it as a foundation for a)
Many thanks,
--
John Mettraux - http://jmettraux.wordpress.com
--
you received this message because you are subscribed to the "ruote users" group.
to post : send email to [email protected]
to unsubscribe : send email to [email protected]
more options : http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-users?hl=en
