On 6/13/01 4:06 PM, "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Based on the fact that the Turbine project contains a PythonAssembler I
> guess that people see how valuable Python can be in terms of rapid
> development. Given this what do people think about extending Velocity to
> deal with Python objects being placed into the context directly?
Absolutely no way.
You can use a way similar to what we do in Turbine, and we did it
without having to change Velocity. Velocity is simple and we hope
to keep it that way.
There has to be a better way to add Python support to your
application without having to alter Velocity.
>
> I have added support to ASTIdentifier by adding a PythonExecutor that will
> try to resolve reference from anything that subclasses PyObject. This is a
> pretty clean fit I think and doesn't require much code. I was about to
> extend ASTMethod to handle the method case, but here is the thing. I don't
> want to create a solid dependency on Jython in the Velocity codebase. What
> I would like from people are ideas about how to extend the AbstractExecutor
> notion to be more like plugable directive and then extend this notion to
> the AST{Identifier, Method, Reference?}
>
>
> Then these could walk a runtime defined list of Executors and preform the
> right handling without needing to link velocity with the handlers codebase.
> What do people think? Is this just a custom body of work or should we look
> at adding something like this to the main codebase?
>
> Thanks
> Ben
--
jvz.
http://tambora.zenplex.org
http://jakarta.apache.org/turbine
http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity
http://jakarta.apache.org/alexandria
http://jakarta.apache.org/commons
