Hi, Bertrand Delacretaz schrieb: > Hi, > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:39 AM, Felix Meschberger <[email protected]> > wrote: >> ...So the request "GET /some/path.print.html" could be handled by any of >> the following scripts >> >> path.GET.jsp >> GET.jsp >> PathGET.java >> path.html.esp... > > That's really only interesting for the java case, right?
Yes, actually, it is really only important for the java case. > > So why not limit this to .java scripts? IIRC the resolver goes through > available scripts and assigns priority weights to them, it might not > be too hard to let the script engines contribute to these weights > (haven't looked in detail though). The problem is that the script resource collector does not know and does not care about ScriptEngines. It just collects resources and weighs them according to their name and thus "match" for handling the request. Only later will the resources be adapted to Servlet.class, which then checks the file name to see whether a ScriptEngine is registered for that extension. So, the resource collector has now knowledge here and handling .java scripts specially at this place is an absolute no-go (IMHO). In the end, the solution is applied completely or not at all. Regards Felix > > I fully agree about making our .java "script" names nicer, either we > support them or we don't, and the current support with weird script > names is not pretty. > > -Bertrand >
