This should be done with care though IMO. To me, one big advantage of T5 over JSP's with EL or OGNL is that you are forced to keep the logic out of the templates for the most part. Simple comparisons and single parameter accessors seem okay, but I've always been surprised when seeing people on the list want full OGNL functionality. Maybe I've had too many issues with overcomplicated JSP's that have subsequently been broken by designers over the years to want to the temptation any more... lol.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Howard Lewis Ship [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 12 May 2008 21:59 > To: Tapestry users > Subject: Re: T5: Calling method with parameter in prop > > Mor expression language would be great; the pain is when you pull > values out of a Map or Collection and lose their type, at which point > you also lose annotations and components such as BeanEditor and Grid > no longer operate as expected. > > But I agree that having a few boolean operators in the expression > language would be great: eq, lt, gt, gteq, lteq, etc. > > On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 2:26 AM, Andreas Pardeike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Don't know what you folks do, but I have created a bunch of custom > > bindings for different cases. The only thing I actually miss is the > > ability to COMBINE them. > > > > I.e., I have added a binding > > > > equals:foo=bar > > > > where foo and bar can be other binding objects or literals. I use > > it successfully for switch/case situations like in > > > > <t:if test="equals:foo='abc'"></t:if> > > <t:if test="equals:foo='def'"></t:if> > > .. > > <t:if test="equals:foo='xyz'"></t:if> > > > > without the need to write a lot of getters. > > > > Now, I also have > > > > map:foo.bar > > > > where foo is suppose to be a HashMap and it will call foo.get(bar). > > > > As a result, all I want is the ability to have a way to specify foo > and > > bar with the same binding prefix as in the beginning. > > > > For example, if I have a object that has a getter that returns a > > hashmap, I would love to write > > > > ---------------------- > > map:(prop:obj.foo).bar > > ---------------------- > > > > which would call > > > > obj.getFoo().get('bar') > > > > If I could get this working (I don't care about the syntax), I would > be > > able to fulfill all my need by writing (and maybe contributing) a > few > > custom bindings. > > > > > > > > > > On 9 maj 2008, at 18.31, Sven Homburg wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > we will see what can we do .... > > > > > > 2008/5/9 Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Nope; I just want to let you create Insanely Great things, using > T5 as > > the > > > > base. > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 9:10 AM, Sven Homburg > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > howard, > > > > > > > > > > you make us jobless ;-) > > > > > > > > > > 2008/5/9 Howard Lewis Ship <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In 5.1 I want to extend the Tapestry property expression > language > > > > > > quite a bit further to address this (invoking methods), as > well as > > map > > > > > > and array ceation ... basically, all the cool OGNL stuff > people > > miss. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 7:52 AM, kranga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > In looking at converting from T3 to T5, I've to deal with > > constructs > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > such > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > as: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > class="ognl:menuClassName('home')" where getMenuClassName > uses > > the > > > > > > > parameter to compare with the page's "id" passed in to > determine > > if > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > > > > > > > the currentPage or not. So the template has multiple links > with > > > > > > > > > > > > > constructs > > > > > > > > > > > > > such as: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > class="ognl:menuClassName('about')" > > > > > > > class="ognl:menuClassName('contact')" etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > How do I do this in T5 given that prop bindings to methods > cannot > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > accept > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > arguments? I'm sure there is a workaround, I just can't > seem to > > find > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Howard M. Lewis Ship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sven Homburg > > > > > > > > > > > > > Howard M. Lewis Ship > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sven Homburg > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > -- > Howard M. Lewis Ship > > Creator Apache Tapestry and Apache HiveMind > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
