+1 On Aug 13, 2016 10:18 AM, "gil portenseigne" <gil.portensei...@nereide.fr> wrote:
> Yes i like this plan :) > > Gil > > Le 12/08/2016 à 13:26, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : > >> Yes, and I believe, when we will have worked out Gradle stuff (at least: >> finishing it, adding plugins, correctly documenting the whole) we should >> gather to work on this and slowly replace/improve the old good Minilang >> >> Could be the R17 main task? >> >> Jacques >> >> >> Le 12/08/2016 à 12:34, gil portenseigne a écrit : >> >>> >>> +1 >>> >>> Indeed, and moreover in the wiki page you link, there is autocompletion >>> configuration in IDE Integration part. >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Gil >>> >>> >>> Le 12/08/2016 à 12:13, Jacques Le Roux a écrit : >>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> I think Jacopo has more to say about that :) >>>> >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Groovy+ >>>> DSL+for+OFBiz+business+logic >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> >>>> Le 09/08/2016 à 19:11, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit : >>>> >>>>> I would like to add to what Scott already mentioned that minilang is >>>>> not >>>>> only difficult to debug but also overly verbose. >>>>> >>>>> However, minilang exists and continues to be used I think because of >>>>> the >>>>> ctrl-space auto complete combined with XSD definitions for the >>>>> statements. >>>>> This makes it a DSL (not too pretty) and this is something that we did >>>>> not >>>>> provide a reasonable alternative for. Groovy makes a good candidate >>>>> for an >>>>> alternative DSL but we don't have something yet which is >>>>> comprehensively >>>>> documented with an easy auto-complete feature. This is very important >>>>> for >>>>> many developers I think. So we need to think of a good alternative >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Scott Gray < >>>>> scott.g...@hotwaxsystems.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I'm certainly no fan of minilang. I prefer something I can step through >>>>>> with a debugger. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> Scott >>>>>> >>>>>> On 9/08/2016 20:55, "Paul Piper" <p...@ilscipio.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Skip, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I fear that you may be right with regards to minilang and the >>>>>>> community, >>>>>>> though luckily with your own projects you can set your own >>>>>>> standards. I >>>>>>> learned the hard way that minilang leads to more cluttered code and >>>>>>> >>>>>> though >>>>>> >>>>>>> there are some benefits (the automapping of service maps or >>>>>>> entity-auto >>>>>>> >>>>>> for >>>>>> >>>>>>> creating crud services), I would strongly recommend anyone to rather >>>>>>> >>>>>> invest >>>>>> >>>>>>> the time into proper java or groovy code. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> As for the use of widgets over ftl, perhaps it is worth noting that >>>>>>> we >>>>>>> streamlined both for Scipio ERP. They share the same underlying set >>>>>>> of >>>>>>> macros and will create the hence create the same HTML & classes as >>>>>>> are >>>>>>> defined by your theme. So if people prefer to use widgets, they can. >>>>>>> We >>>>>>> relied on this, when cleaning up & converting usable screens alot, >>>>>>> as not >>>>>>> always it would make sense to transfer them to ftl. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That being said, our goal is to further replace widgets by ftl logic >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> >>>>>> we >>>>>> >>>>>>> move along. For both minilang and widgets the reason on our end is >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> neither technology is used anywhere outside of the ofbiz project and >>>>>>> thus >>>>>>> adds to the overall learning-curve for newcomers. We much rather >>>>>>> rely on >>>>>>> trusted alternatives that are easier to pick up for our project ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Paul >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> View this message in context: http://ofbiz.135035.n4.nabble. >>>>>>> com/Ofbiz-Cookbook-tp4690647p4690733.html >>>>>>> Sent from the OFBiz - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >
