So we would probably have:
public class Sling {
private HttpServletRequest request;
private HttpServletResponse response;
public void include(String path) throws ServletException, IOException
{
RequestDispatcher rd = request.getRequestDispatcher(path);
rd.include(request, response);
}
}
Would this be for scripting-only ?
Regards
Felix
Am Freitag, den 19.10.2007, 10:57 +0200 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
> On 10/19/07, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > > ...a convenience class should encapsulate this in order to
> > > make microsling easy to use. either:
> > > sling.include(...)
> > > document.include(...)
> > > response.include(...)
> >
> > Would not do that. People know the Servlet API and we should not invent
> > additional helper stuff, which is just hard to maintain. Rather we will
> > provide taglibs for JSP (in Sling not microsling, though).
>
> Why taglibs for JSP and no equivalents for other languages?
>
> In my view of microsling's target audience, people should not need to
> know the Servlet API to do a simple include: that's something people
> do all the time, so it should be obvious.
>
> And I don't want to cripple microsling either, it's smaller than
> Sling, less extensible, and lacks enterprise-level features maybe, but
> microsling users should not feel like second-class citizens, IMHO.
>
> So I really think we need a comfortable way to include content in
> microsling scripts.
>
> -Bertrand
