Uberspector eh? Sounds like a good direction. The jython Uberspector link
will be a big help.
Assuming I can get the Ubspector together, how does one set a new
Uberspector into Velocity?
On 2/20/07, Will Glass-Husain < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I like the Uberspector idea. Nice and generic. Cleanly provides a
bridge between Velocity and Ruby syntax.
On 2/20/07, Nathan Bubna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Oh, and the other thing that might work is to implement a custom
> Uberspect that knows how to properly look up methods on a RubyObject.
> This would probably be more work than an event handler or simple
> object wrapper, but i imagine that it could turn out to be the most
> useful for integrating JRuby and Velocity in the long run.
>
> On 2/20/07, Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How would the RubyObjectWrapper work when specifying method argument,
> > e.g$jrubyObject.testMethod( "argument1", "argument2" ) ?
> >
> > I already start down the road of using an Event handler for
InvalidReference
> > to catch instances of RubyObject. It works for $jrubyObject.testMethod
, but
> > I am having the same problem as above, how to handle method arguments?
The
> > InvalidReferenceEventHandler#invalidMethod does not appear to contain
the
> > argument information for a reference $jrubyObject.testMethod(
"argument1",
> > "argument2" )
> >
> > thanks,
> > Michael
> >
> > On 2/20/07, Nathan Bubna <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > I imagine you could get pretty far by wrapping the RubyObjects in a
> > > more Velocity-friendly object that takes advantage how Velocity
treats
> > > get(String) methods before putting it into the context.
> > >
> > > Perhaps something like:
> > >
> > >
> > > public class RubyObjectWrapper {
> > > private RubyObject foo;
> > > public RubyObjectWrapper(RubyObject wrapMe) {
> > > this.foo = wrapMe;
> > > }
> > > public Object get(String methodName) {
> > > return new RubyObjectWrapper(this.foo.callMethod(
> > > foo.getRuntime(), methodName));
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > If i understand the problem space here, this should allow you to
> > > traverse the object graph for you RubyObjects as you ask:
> > >
> > > $jrubyObject.testMethod
> > >
> > > I'm really not at all familiar with Ruby, much less JRuby, but
perhaps
> > > this will help you get on the right track. I use tricks like this
to
> > > simplify the VTL syntax for various tools in VelocityTools all the
> > > time.
> > >
> > > The other thing which may help here is using Velocity's EventHandler
> > > capabilities to recognize when a reference is a RubyObject and treat
> > > it differently. Will is much more experienced and knowledgeable on
> > > event handlers than i am, so he may be able to tell you better
whether
> > > or not that is a dead end for this sort of thing.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/20/07, Michael <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > I have been using Velocity for years now and find it the best
templating
> > > > language around. This has lead me to try and spread the joy by
> > > attempting to
> > > > swap out RHTML for Velocity in JRuby on Rails.
> > > >
> > > > I have a few simple Ruby test scripts that parse a templates
Velocity.
> > > > Things get messy when Velocity needs to traverse an object graph.
When
> > > used
> > > > in Rails, the VelocityContext can have a mix of Java objects and
> > > RubyObject
> > > > (these are the problematic ones). The RubyObject is a wrapper for
a
> > > Ruby
> > > > object from the JRuby runtime. The RubyObjects do not have static
typed
> > > > methods, but everything must go through the method 'callMethod'.
> > > >
> > > > For example, to use velocity notation on the Java object 'sample'
to get
> > > the
> > > > method 'test':
> > > > $sample.test
> > > >
> > > > would be on a RubyObject 'sample' to get the method 'test':
> > > > $sample.callMethod( $sample.getRuntime(), "test" )
> > > >
> > > > Things get sticker for passing arguments to a method in
RubyObject, all
> > > > arguments must implement IRubyObject. I will just skip over this
for
> > > now.
> > > >
> > > > Here is the crux of my question, is it possible to extend
Velocity to
> > > add
> > > > support for handling RubyObjects? Ideally Velocity would be able
to
> > > > determine whether an object is an implementation of RubyObject, or
not,
> > > and
> > > > handle appropriately, i.e $jrubyObject.testMethod could be call
directly
> > > > instead of the callMethod for a RubyObject.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > > Michael
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>
--
Forio Business Simulations
Will Glass-Husain
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.forio.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
