On Nov 23, 2007 9:50 AM, Felix Meschberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi all, > > Am Freitag, den 23.11.2007, 01:40 +0200 schrieb Alexandru Popescu ☀: > > Haven't been around, so excuse me if this discussion has a long > > history behind. > > Never mind, this is a young story :-) > > > IMO we should go with the standard, and just offer a > > small door for non-standard solutions. I am pretty sure that the JDK > > is/will be more stable than BSF. > > I absolutely agree. This is also why I was reluctant in the first place > to go BSF (de-facto standard) or Java Scripting (only available as of > Java 6) and we came up with our own Scripting Engine interface. > > Now, the case is different today: We BSF 2.4 has its own API while BSF > 3.0 currently in beta2 ([1]) is an implementation of the Java Scripting > API and comes with all the API classes runnable in Java 1.4 and higher. > So, this is where I propose to start. This way we have the standard > (Java Scripting) and can run on Java 5. >
I couldn't find the part about BSF3.0 being a Java Scripting API implementation, but I trust you. In this case, I do agree going this way, as it is exactly what I was suggesting (but without knowing that BSF is following the standard API now). ./alex -- .w( the_mindstorm )p. > Regards > Felix > > [1] http://jakarta.apache.org/bsf/bsfnews.html > > > > > > > bests, > > > > ./alex > > -- > > .w( the_mindstorm )p. > >
