Re: [Springframework-developer] Final preparations for 1.1 RC1

[<jue...@we...>]

Darren,
=20
Oops, I forgot to discuss that one: The reason why I removed the =
htmlEscape property from the "springBind" macro is to be able to =
participate in a RequestContext-level default, e.g. set via =
springMacroRequestContext.setDefaultHtmlEscape(true). Note that the =
createBindStatus invocation on RequestContext uses the defaultHtmlEscape =
flag then.
=20
I've just adapted the RequestContext implementation a bit further to =
also be able to participate in a ServletContext-level default, just like =
our JSP tags can, i.e. a "defaultHtmlEscape" context-param in web.xml. =
JSP tags and Velocity/FreeMarker macros can then even share such an =
application-wide default. I'll commit this promptly.
=20
Actually, the "springBindEscaped" macro should rather take an explicit =
htmlEscape parameter, to be able to override defaultHtmlEscape=3Dtrue to =
false for a specific macro. Hmm, what name could we use for this? =
"springBindWithExplicitEscape" is clearly too long... "springBind" with =
overloaded signature is not possible in Velocity... maybe still =
"springBindEscaped", but just with an explicit parameter?
=20
=20
Matt,
=20
Note that the "springMacroRequestContext" is not really meant to be =
accessed directly; it is mainly meant to be used by Spring-provided =
macros. If you want to use a RequestContext in your own expressions, =
always specify the "requestContextAttribute" accordingly. We should =
highlight that in the docs.
=20
=20
Juergen
=20

________________________________

Von: spr...@li... im Auftrag =
von Darren Davison
Gesendet: Sa 24.07.2004 10:18
An: spr...@li...
Betreff: Re: [Springframework-developer] Final preparations for 1.1 RC1



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Saturday 24 July 2004 01:09, Matt Raible wrote:
> I tried this out today and it works well.  The only thing I saw that
> might cause confusion for users is there are 2 macros for Velocity
> (#springBind and #springBindEscaped) - whereas FreeMarker has one w/ =
an
> "escape" parameter.  I imagine that folks using FreeMarker might be
> migrating from Velocity, so making the macros consistent might be
> helpful.  Who knows - just a thought.

FreeMarker has a default value of false for the 2nd param so you only =
need
supply it to override it.  Velocity can't do that.

The other options for Velocity are:

 * always supply the second parameter in every call to springBind

 * use a globally scoped, well-known variable defined in user templates.


I prefer personally to always require the additional parameter.  It's =
more
consistent with FM and won't cause user templates to break if they =
migrate
them to FM using the automatic conversion tool they have available.

What do you think?


> I would make sure and document that the name =
"springMacroRequestContext"
> can be overridden by specifying a "requestContextAttribute" property.
> It's much easier to write $rc.getMessage() than
> $springMacroRequestContext.getMessage(). ;-)

I will, thanks.

- --
Darren Davison
Public Key: http://www.davison.uk.net/pages/key.htm
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBAhtIKLMLAN01aw0RAisgAKCfjnl6dzgkdQ91o9lUrUvtd9RGWQCfRJNq
cn71Z/8ovFjaDLQRxtBwTfo=3D
=3Dlvg2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by BEA Weblogic Workshop
FREE Java Enterprise J2EE developer tools!
Get your free copy of BEA WebLogic Workshop 8.1 today.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idG21&alloc_id=10040&op=3Dick
_______________________________________________
Springframework-developer mailing list
Spr...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/springframework-developer