>
> > I asked for an example where you actually need EL -> can't
> achieve the
> > same with (standard) tags.
>
> Oh, ok. No, you are right, all the EL expressions do is make
> my page look a little cleaner vs using c:out. Not that big of
> a deal I guess, however they are nice for certain things...
Actually I was saying the opposite :-) EL makes your page looking
"uglier"...
I mean, you can write
${bean.boolProp?'Yes, I am an idiot':'No, not an idiot'}
Or
<% bean.boolProp?"Yes, I am an idiot":"No, not an idiot" %>
I think the idea of tags was the elimination of scriptlets, and now you
bring them back through the back door.
>
> For examle... say I wanted to quickly change the color of a
> class var for table row color based on the index...
>
> I could just do...
>
> <tr class="${status.index % 2 != 0? 'odd':'even'}">
>
> Granted I should make a tag that does this (and I did), but
> it was just for illustration and it seems cleaner than going
> the whole <c:choose> route imo.
I prefer the tag.
<tr class="<xyz:switchStyle/>"> looks easier to read for me, and also for a
web designer, and I think,
one of our goals should be, not to write jsps by ourselfs, but enable a
html-producer to create pages.
And they can handle documented and explained tags, but not over-powered EL.
>
> Or, as in the intial question posed, where you wanted to
> display different things based on a boolean...
>
> ${bean.boolProp?'Yes, I am an idiot':'No, not an idiot'}
What about logic:equal? Requires more lines, true, but c:choose would be as
readable as the above line.
Or even a logic:select (not there yet, true, but not a big deal).
And now the 'deadly' anti-EL argument:
With tags you have at least some, not full, but some, compile time type
checking :-)
Leon
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
