• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: [Wonder-disc] Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Wonder-disc] Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings


  • Subject: Re: [Wonder-disc] Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings
  • From: Archibald Singleton <email@hidden>
  • Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 18:36:04 -0300


On 27 Mar 2008, at 18:06, Mike Schrag wrote:
I assume you mean WOOGNL inline bindings? Yes, the syntax is ?

Yep.

key="value" ... Pretty easy, huh :)

Of course, thanks! I *almost* tried it but'?' not being a valid XML name character, I though it wouldn't work.


On a related note is it possible to change the market ( currently
"$")

Wow, pretty interesting lapse on my part... I meant to write "marker" (guess the "$" may have something to do with me writing market instead :-)


used to denote non-litteral expressions in ognl bindings (e.g
use the WO 5.4.x "[...] " marker)? And if it is, how to do it?
Not currently, though it may be coming.  I still say $xxx is a better
syntax than [xxx].

It may be better but I don't like special prefix characters à la perl (just a personal taste). Though truth be told "$" being (almost) the only special character makes it bearable). Also being a ObjC programmer I already have the [xxx] in my finger memory (and I do like that syntax in ObjC contrary to some).


I really dig WOOGNL but the syntax is pretty ugly :-)

 The problem is that configurable inline binding
syntaxes makes things a complete mess.  It means you can't mix
frameworks because each framework may choose its own syntax.  So I'm
sort of hesitant to add a configurable option provide a custom prefix/
suffix (like 5.4 does) because it seems like it's a long term
disaster, and I can't wholesale switch to "[xxx]" in Wonder (one
because I hate the syntax, two because we have backwards compatibility
to consider).  It would have been nice for 5.4 to have adopted the $
syntax that we had been using, but things didn't turn out that way.
The only way to properly deal with it is by setting the syntax you use
in the framework Info.plist or something, but that seems like super
overkill.

Agreed.

= tmk =

_______________________________________________
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


  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: [Wonder-disc] Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings
      • From: Mike Schrag <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings (From: Archibald Singleton <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings (From: Mike Schrag <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings
  • Next by Date: Re: [Wonder-disc] Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings
  • Previous by thread: Re: Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings
  • Next by thread: Re: [Wonder-disc] Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread