Re: WebObjects 5.4 is out.
Re: WebObjects 5.4 is out.
- Subject: Re: WebObjects 5.4 is out.
- From: Mike Schrag <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 07:28:40 -0400
Personally I find creating a simple groovy expression in your wod
binding cleaner looking than WOOgnl.
e.g.,
SomeDiv : WOGenericContainer {
<....>
omitTags = hasFoo && hasBar;
}
I wasn't very clear -- I'm with you on this (though honestly this is
actually identical to OGNL except that WOOGNL requires the leading
"~". 5.4 lets you plugin custom association parsers -- you can
literally write groovy methods as bindings. It's academically
interesting, but sort of crazy. There's a pretty wild example of what
the parser can do floating around that I'm not sure if it made it into
the developer examples or not ... I'll have to check.
Other than that, I think Wonder's is a more developer-friendly
parser. I am, however, totally biased on this topic :) I think
groovy components over in-place groovy bindings is probably the
better approach to solve the dynamic binding problem.
If it's a developer updating the page, sure. It's simple things like
being able to prefix a numeric id for css purposes where groovy
bindings are very helpful for a web designer.
Yep, which is why I'm pro OGNL as well (and helper functions, though
that's less of a designer thing, but similar sort of goals). WOLips
actually validates limited OGNL expressions -- so if you do
"~person.firstName + ' ' + person.lastName", WOLips will actually
validate those keypaths for you. So how do you determine when to eval
as groovy and when it's not? Or is it just always eval'd as groovy
for your apps?
ms
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden