i guess the question is: what will we get by using this that we dont already have?
-igor On 11/18/06, Chris Brock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You should note that the actual template parser and expression parser are completely different. The template parser itself has control-flow constructs, but the expression parser alone does not. Also, you can even drill down and just use the PropertyAccessor in MVEL. So it's possible to squelch out some of the higher level functionalities based on whatever API integration point you choose. Martijn Dashorst wrote: > > Not as a default. It is even a templating solution and I don't want > any logic constructs as a default in Wicket's templates. > > The current expressions possible with Wicket are fast and allow for > enough flexibility for most purposes. > > I don't think it is something we should add to core. But I'm > completely fine with having someone create a wicket-stuff project for > it. > > Martijn > > On 11/17/06, Erik van Oosten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hello, >> >> There is a new property expression language called MVEL. If you look at >> http://wiki.mvflex.org/index.php?title=MVEL_Language_Reference you can >> see it is quite powerful. It also claims to be very fast. >> >> Perhaps it is appropriate to use MVEL as Wicket's default property >> language? >> Or do you think it is too powerful? >> >> Regards, >> Erik. >> >> -- >> Erik van Oosten >> http://www.day-to-day-stuff.blogspot.com/ >> >> > > > -- > http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/vote_for/wicket Vote > for http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/stuff/wicket Wicket > at the http://www.thebeststuffintheworld.com/ Best Stuff in > the World! > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/New-property-expression-langauge%3A-MVEL-tf2650450.html#a7426837 Sent from the Wicket - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
