Re: Nested Java directives - best practice on how to make values available to inner directive?
Attila Szegedi <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.web.freemarker.user |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2008.01.31., at 11:16, Daniel Dekany wrote: > To fellow FM developers: > > - Given that 2.4 will not be released in the foreseeable future, and > even then it will not be 100% BC, parent-children communication > definitely should be backported to 2.3.x. This is again a very basic > feature for a template language, shame that it isn't there for > years. (Reminds me to the history of #nested...) Would backporting > be difficult? > > - Can TemplateDirectiveModel and TempateTransformModel calls > participate as parents in the current trunk? (And as children for > that mater?) I don't think so... of course, they should be able to. > Java and FTL are just to languages to implement custom directives. We should ideally make it so that the engine code doesn't deal with the Macro class at all. Engine would only rely on TemplateDirectiveModel, and we'd make Macro a TemplateDirectiveModel. Then we'd achieve actual equality between a [#macro] and a Java- defined TemplateDirectiveModel. Attila. -- home: http://www.szegedi.org weblog: http://constc.blogspot.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/