Re: language extensions? future direction?

On November 27, 2004 11:14 am, Daniel Leuck wrote:
> > It's important to me that I have the ability to move code back
> > and forth between compiled and scripted environments.
>
> How does _adding_ syntax prevent you from doing this?  As long as BeanShell
> remains a superset of the Java language this feature is preserved.  Even if
> you argue that, in a team environment, others might use non-Java language
> extensions (which already exist) they can be switched off, just as
> scriptlets can be disabled in JSP.
>
> I understand the argument that bug fixes should be a higher priority, but I
> respectfully disagree with the assertion that optional syntax extensions
> (which can be disabled in the interpreter) would destroy BeanShell's
> interoperability.

I'll admit my argument isn't exactly logical; it's mostly based on fear - that 
someone will break the Java language compatibility. 

-- 
Free SyncML-capable J2ME & J2SE replacement for Exchange and Outlook
http://www.ScheduleWorld.com/
WAP: http://www.ScheduleWorld.com/sw/WAPToday?id=4000&tz=EST
WebDAV: http://www.ScheduleWorld.com/sw/webDAVDir/4000.ics
VFREEBUSY: http://www.ScheduleWorld.com/sw/freebusy/4000.ifb


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. 
http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/