iberck wrote:
thank you of your response and your time
Now I understand the concept.
No problem :)
--
Francois Armand
Etudes & Développements J2EE
Groupe Linagora - http://www.linagora.com
Tél.: +33 (0)1 58 18 68 28
---
http://fanf42.blogspot.com
InterLDAP - http://interldap.org
Fed
thank you of your response and your time
Now I understand the concept.
Francois Armand wrote:
>
> iberck wrote:
>> Hi, I'm developing an application with tap 5..
>>
> Great, good new. Welcome on board !
>> I don't understand why I can't use OGNL inside tap5 and with tap4 yes !
>>
>
> Th
iberck wrote:
Hi, I'm developing an application with tap 5..
Great, good new. Welcome on board !
I don't understand why I can't use OGNL inside tap5 and with tap4 yes !
That's a design choice made by HLS. OGNL suffer some drawbacks,
including a performance penalty (even after the amazi
I think for T5 as default:
Tapestry's binding language might be extended to do some simple
evaluation at best, and nothing more! the simpler the better in my
view, isn't this the general idea of using components and moving away
from embedded scripting? I think, in general, support for pul
Oh wellit wouldn't hurt my feelings if anyone used MVEL. I'm
only as loyal to the best technology and hope everyone else would be
too.
On Nov 16, 2007 4:35 PM, Davor Hrg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> thanks,
> I've played with it only a bit...
>
> It was that time that MVEL was said to be muc
thanks,
I've played with it only a bit...
It was that time that MVEL was said to be much faster than OGNL
and very long flame on serverside.
I've just wanted try both, and made a small project that adds
both binding prefixes..
(I was not testing speeds .. just integration...)
after playing with
You can know the type in advance by calling
OgnlContext.getCurrentType() after evaluating an expression (or
getPreviousType() / getFirstType() / the type and accessor types are
all pushed on to a stack now)..
It also supports generics / enums / varargs / etc now..
On Nov 16, 2007 2:42 PM, Davor H
of course, youll need the dependancy in your pom:
ognl
ognl
2.6.9
On Nov 16, 2007 8:42 PM, Davor Hrg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ognl can be easily added as a binding prefix,
> however expect some features to not work
> because tapestry in some occasions needs
ognl can be easily added as a binding prefix,
however expect some features to not work
because tapestry in some occasions needs to
know in advance type that the expression will return
(and this is statically, when bindings are prepared)
I think I saw that ognl has methods that calculate
return typ
On Nov 16, 2007 1:53 PM, Chris Lewis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps this is a horrible idea, but if so I think it is transitive and
> the actual bad idea is having an expression language at all. Its
> certainly true that with such power one has enough rope to hang oneself,
> at least from th
10 matches
Mail list logo
