Re: [Wonder-disc] Is there an equivalent for the ?key="value" syntax but for ognl inline bindings
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: Mike Schrag <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 27 Mar 2008 17:47:23 -0400
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 :-)
My bullet points on the subject :)
* [xxx] guarantees you an extra character to type on every binding -- completion can never fill it in for you because it never knows when you're done * even Apple doesn't use [xxx] syntax for cocoa bindings OR ObjC 2.0 properties (which were designed to look like bindings), though admittedly they don't use $ either, but they EXPLICITLY did not use [xxx] markup * $xxx is the standard inline markup of just about every template language, which, for one, also makes it consistent with the velocity templates that we use other places inside of WOLips
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