I think you and Craig are both right. So how about using a "_" instead of a "$"?
> Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 12:48:18 -0700 > From: Arvind Srinivasan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: $ in JSP names > To: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: Kin-Man Chung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT > > > > "Craig R. McClanahan" wrote: > > > > On Mon, 15 Jul 2002, Kin-Man Chung wrote: > > > > > Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 11:55:15 -0700 (PDT) > > > From: Kin-Man Chung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Reply-To: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > > > Kin-Man Chung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: Re: $ in JSP names > > > > > > I totally agree that the use of $ in a file name is a pain in the neck. > > > In fact, I don't see the need for appending a "$jsp" at all. Currently > > > we have the following mapping: > > > > > > jsp file name: foo.jsp > > > class name: foo$jsp > > > servelt file name: foo$jsp.java > > > class file name: foo$jsp.class > > > > > > I think it'd be perfectly OK to use the following mapping: > > > > > > jsp file name: foo.jsp > > > class name: foo > > > servelt file name: foo.java > > > class file name: foo.class > > > > > > > I thought the reason for appending something ($jsp or _jsp) was to > prevent errors in the generated java files for jsp filenames that use > one of java's keywords - default.jsp or new.jsp. > > -Arvind -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
