Re: Velocity Macro Improvement - GSCO

2007-05-30 Thread Supun Kamburugamuva
Hi, I think changing the macro syntax is bit tricky. So I'd like to go with maximum recursive depths. Supun. I think I'm getting little bit confused here. On 5/30/07, Will Glass-Husain [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, Oh, definitely, we should target our next release, version 1.6. And we

Re: Velocity Macro Improvement - GSCO

2007-05-30 Thread Claude Brisson
Le mardi 29 mai 2007 à 12:16 -0700, Will Glass-Husain a écrit : Hi, Oh, definitely, we should target our next release, version 1.6. And we should aim for JDK 1.4 compile-time / JDK 1.3 run-time compatibility. No reason to change that. There could some reasons to require java 1.5, like the

Re: Velocity Macro Improvement - GSCO

2007-05-30 Thread Henning Schmiedehausen
Yes, Claude is right. This was unintended (though it would be cool). :-) Supun, if you want to start here, please go in slow steps first. Don't try to tackle all problems at once. First getting the , to work is great (as shown in Claude's example). Best regards Henning

Re: Velocity Macro Improvement - GSCO

2007-05-30 Thread Supun Kamburugamuva
On 5/30/07, Henning Schmiedehausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, Claude is right. This was unintended (though it would be cool). :-) Supun, if you want to start here, please go in slow steps first. Don't try to tackle all problems at once. First getting the , to work is great (as shown in

Re: Velocity Macro Improvement - GSCO

2007-05-30 Thread Will Glass-Husain
Hi Supun, My suggestion is to run with the macro max recursion depth issue while we argue this out. We've previously changed the syntax to allow commas in the macro parameters when *calling* a macro. I think Claude and Henning are recommending we do the same thing when *defining* a macro.

Re: Velocity Macro Improvement - GSCO

2007-05-29 Thread Supun Kamburugamuva
Hi, I have gone through most of the stuff pointed by Henning and now I think I'm ready to start the real work. So I thought I should start with a simple thing at the beginning. So I choose the 4th suggestion (blank as argument delimiter') from Hennings list (I don't think this will take much

Re: Velocity Macro Improvement - GSCO

2007-05-29 Thread Claude Brisson
There is also an implicit syntaxic change in Henning's code example: he uses #macro myNamedMacro($arg1, $arg2, $arg3) ... do something with $arg1, $arg2, $arg3 #end which is quite natural but AFAIK not supported since the valid syntax is: #macro (myNamedMacro, $arg1, $arg2, $arg3)

Re: Velocity Macro Improvement - GSCO

2007-05-29 Thread Will Glass-Husain
Actually, that's already implemented in Velocity 1.5 #somemacro (arg1, arg2, arg3) works fine. It used to be that spaces were required but no more. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/VELOCITY-430 How about limiting the maximum recursion of macros? VELOCITY-297? Alternately, if you want

Re: Velocity Macro Improvement - GSCO

2007-05-29 Thread Will Glass-Husain
Hi, Oh, definitely, we should target our next release, version 1.6. And we should aim for JDK 1.4 compile-time / JDK 1.3 run-time compatibility. No reason to change that. Is there a need to change the macro definition syntax? The other issues seem more urgent. (and all backwards

Velocity Macro Improvement - GSCO

2007-05-08 Thread Supun Kamburugamuva
Hi, I would like to start working on the macro issues as soon as possible. I know the code writing officially starts on 28th May. But I thought starting early would be better. I have gone through the macro code and still I don't have a clear picture of how the macro stuff is working. What I