Gary Bentley wrote:
Hi Jonathan,
The original aim of the request was to allow a JoSQL statement to be
used directly within Velocity. More specifically it would be that the
WHERE clause, ORDER BY clause and potentially the GROUP BY clause (and
as a further extension the LIMIT and GROUP BY ORD
Hi Jonathan,
The original aim of the request was to allow a JoSQL statement to be
used directly within Velocity. More specifically it would be that the
WHERE clause, ORDER BY clause and potentially the GROUP BY clause (and
as a further extension the LIMIT and GROUP BY ORDER clauses) could be
Gary Bentley wrote:
Hi,
I'm the developer of JoSQL (http://josql.sf.net) and I've had a request
from a user to extend the foreach directive to include JoSQL processing
facilities.
Along the lines of:
#foreach( $mud in $mudsOnSpecial where $customer.hasPurchased($mud)
order by $mud.price)
On Jan 17, 2008 7:34 AM, Christopher Schultz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gary,
>
> Gary Bentley wrote:
> > Actually, just so I know could you let me know what the life-cycle is
> > for tool objects? Is a new tool object created per request and
> > hence discarded after the request has been made.
Cool. If it doesn't do what you need (like access the velocity
context or velocity engine), you can bet one of the other tools
probably does.
On Jan 16, 2008 10:03 PM, Gary Bentley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thanks for that Nathan, I'll probably use the LoopTool as a template, it
> appears to h
Gary,
Gary Bentley wrote:
Actually, just so I know could you let me know what the life-cycle is
for tool objects? Is a new tool object created per request and
hence discarded after the request has been made. Or is a pool of
objects created and then an object assigned from the pool to each
req
Gary,
Gary Bentley wrote:
For the bind variables is it possible to use "?" as the placeholder like
you can for JDBC. Is that what you meant?
Yeah, that's what I meant.
-chris
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Le jeudi 17 janvier 2008 à 17:01 +1000, Gary Bentley a écrit :
> Hi Nathan,
>
> Just on the annotation, if I set it as request will that mean that there
> is 1 JoSQL object per request?
Yes.
> For example if a template is processed in a single request that has 2
> josql.execute calls (say) wil
Actually, just so I know could you let me know what the life-cycle is
for tool objects? Is a new tool object created per request and hence
discarded after the request has been made. Or is a pool of objects
created and then an object assigned from the pool to each request? I am
trying to avoi
Hi Nathan,
Just on the annotation, if I set it as request will that mean that there
is 1 JoSQL object per request?
For example if a template is processed in a single request that has 2
josql.execute calls (say) will it be the same JoSQL object that is used
for both?
I just need to know sin
Thanks for that Nathan, I'll probably use the LoopTool as a template, it
appears to have the items you are talking about.
Gary
Nathan Bubna wrote:
On Jan 16, 2008 2:27 PM, Christopher Schultz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Gary,
Gary Bentley wrote:
For the class name, it's needed becau
Hi Chris,
Thanks for the info.
For the bind variables is it possible to use "?" as the placeholder like
you can for JDBC. Is that what you meant?
Gary
Christopher Schultz wrote:
Gary,
Gary Bentley wrote:
For the class name, it's needed because during the parse it uses the
class name to
On Jan 16, 2008 2:27 PM, Christopher Schultz
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Gary,
>
> Gary Bentley wrote:
> > For the class name, it's needed because during the parse it uses the
> > class name to resolve method/field accesses. Without it resolution
> > would be needed at execution time. In theory
Gary,
Gary Bentley wrote:
For the class name, it's needed because during the parse it uses the
class name to resolve method/field accesses. Without it resolution
would be needed at execution time. In theory it's not needed but it
also allows the query to be parsed into the relevant tree of o
Hi Chris,
For the class name, it's needed because during the parse it uses the
class name to resolve method/field accesses. Without it resolution
would be needed at execution time. In theory it's not needed but it
also allows the query to be parsed into the relevant tree of objects so
that
Gary,
Gary Bentley wrote:
Many thanks for the responses. They are both very helpful. I think at
this point I'll go for Chris's suggestion since that will be easier to
implement. There are some differences between the way that JoSQL and
Velocity works so there will be limitations but overall
Nathan/Chris,
Many thanks for the responses. They are both very helpful. I think at
this point I'll go for Chris's suggestion since that will be easier to
implement. There are some differences between the way that JoSQL and
Velocity works so there will be limitations but overall I think it
Gary,
Gary Bentley wrote:
Along the lines of:
#foreach( $mud in $mudsOnSpecial where $customer.hasPurchased($mud)
order by $mud.price)
This looks like mixing SQL-ish syntax with Java collections, which is
precisely what JoSQL was designed to do. Why extend Velocity when you
can simply use
Hi Gary,
So far as i know, you are in fairly unique territory. The #if and
#foreach directives were never really meant to be extended or
replaced, so far as i know. Their roots go deep into the parser and
will almost certainly require a custom build of Velocity, not just
some configuration and e
19 matches
Mail list logo
