Re: How to build a Custom Include method?

Thanks all for the response. This helps a lot, I think I have everything I
need.

Here are my quick answers to some of your points:

To JR about TemplateLoader: Yes, usually the right way of doing this would
be a template loader. However, in my case the template can depend on many
other states that cannot easily be encoded in a simple string.  For example,
I might choose a different template depending of the httpSession states (or
cookies values) or from where the template is being included included.

To Attila about getEnvironment: This is perfect. I will get the writer from
the Environment.

To Daniel about TemplateDirectiveModel: Cool, makes total sense,
TemplateDirectiveModel is what I need. Is that equivalent to creating a
macro? I assume I use the Configuration.setSharedVariable method.


Jeremy,




On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 3:54 AM, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote:

> Wednesday, July 30, 2008, 7:12:31 AM, Jeremy Chone wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to build a custom include method. Basically, I would
> > like to be able to call something like:
> >
> > ${customInclude(param1,param2)}
> >
> > which will include a template almost as a traditional [#include
> > does. There are two main differences between this customInclude and
> > a traditional freemarker include:
> >
> > 1) customInclude add another level of indirection to get to the
> > template name (handled by java business objects)
> >
> > 2) Each customInclude might have a different model.
> >
> > Today, I have an implementation that works. Basically, I
> > implemented an TemplateMethodModelEx method (customInclude)
>
> It should be a TemplateDirectiveModel, not a TemplateMethodModelEx.
> Thus it is to be called as <@customInclude param1 param2 />, not as
> ${customInclude param1 param2}. Directives are for output
> progressively and without escaping. Interpolations (${...}) are to
> insert the result of simpler expressions, possibly escaped. Anything
> you do with ${...} should not have a side-effect, so it should fiddle
> with the output Writer. Like consider what would happen with your
> solution here: <#assign s = "The output is: ${customInclude(...)} ">.
> It wouldn't work correctly, "s" would be "The output is: ", etc.
>
> > which implements the logic to get the template name, and get the
> > "Writer" object from the param. Then, I just get the template and
> > call template.process with the givent Writer.
>
> (The Writer can be get as the others has already told... your
> customInclude method could be called directly by the users.)
>
> > It's ugly, but it work. I hide this method with a macro, so, as the
> > pages do not have too now about the Writer object/param.
> >
> > Is there better way for doing this? Can I get some more context in a
> TemplateMethodModelEx method ?
> >
> >
> > Jeremy,
>
> --
> Best regards,
>  Daniel Dekany
>
>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

_______________________________________________
FreeMarker-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-user