Re: Nested Java directives - best practice on how to make values available to inner directive?

Saturday, February 2, 2008, 3:55:15 PM, Attila Szegedi wrote:

> 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.

That's highly desirable indeed, and also #function-s should be
TemplateMethodModelEx-s (as it was noted for several times BTW).
However, as far as I understand, it still wouldn't solve the issue
with the parent-children communication (i.e., ?scope in FM 2.4), as
for that the parent must have *FTL* local variables. So, we need to
add something to the API by which a TemplateDirectiveModel, which was
written entirely in Java Language, can create a local variable map, so
it can be accessed by the children like
theParentDirective?scope.theLocalVariable.

-- 
Best regards,
 Daniel Dekany


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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/