You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@turbine.apache.org by Scott Eade <se...@backstagetech.com.au> on 2010/04/23 15:30:03 UTC
Re: Fulcrum components bsf and groovy obsoleted by script?
<gentle>ping</gentle>
Scott
On 6/05/2009 3:26 AM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> thanks for the gentle reminder ...
>
> +) I have an updated version based on the final JSR-223 release (but not
> committed) that works for Groovy and Rhino
> +) this implementation is already using the libraries from
> https://scripting.dev.java.net/
> +) the main problem I had is supporting JDK 1.5 which I solved at
> ApacheCon - the non-released bsf-api-3.0 is an ASF implementation for
> JSR-223
> +) so fulcrum-script is a JDK1.5+ component
>
> So the only thing which stopped me from committing is that the various
> ScriptEngine (Groovy, Rhino) implementation are not on any M2 repo - I
> currently keep them in a lib directory and tell M2 to pick them up from
> there. BTW, I'm pretty sure that https://scripting.dev.java.net/ was
> not BSD licenced a while ago.
>
> Anyway - how to handle the ScriptEngine libraries
>
> +) M2 repo upload request but there are no official releases for the
> them ... :-(
> +) put them in our SVN repo in a "lib" directory with PMC blessing
>
> And the unreleased BSF libraries ...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
> PS: I have already two kids sitting on my lap - need a break
>
>
>
> PS: Many thanks to Felix Meschberger regarding BSF
>
> Scott Eade wrote:
>
>> It appears that JSR-223 is bit of a mixed bag.
>>
>> As Siegfried has said below there were changes to the spec between its
>> 1.0 release and its inclusion in JDK 6:
>>
>> * Namespace was renamed to Bindings
>> * SimpleNamespace became SimpleBindings
>> * Invocable.invoke() methods became Invocable.invokeFunction(String
>> Object...) and Invocable.invokeMethod(Object, String Object...)
>> [note the use of varargs]
>> * there may be one or two other small changes.
>>
>> You can download a bunch of ScriptEngine implementations from
>> https://scripting.dev.java.net/ - I presume these all work with JDK 6,
>> certainly the JavaScript one does. Note that JDK 6 on Windows
>> includes Rhino and the com.sun.script implementation of ScriptEngine,
>> but since scripting engines are optional you cannot actually rely on
>> this being present (e.g. JDK 6 on OS X does not come with Rhino). To
>> use Rhino on OS X with JDK 6 you need the java.net ScriptEngine
>> implementation (which comes in a package named com.sun.phobos.script
>> and appears to work nicely with a standard Rhino download). The
>> java.net implementation is not available in a maven repository (though
>> it is BSD licensed and is not a huge amount of code).
>>
>> AFAICT there is no stand alone version of javax.script that has been
>> updated to reflect the above changes so as to support JDK versions
>> prior to 6. I did come across an Apache ScriptEngine implementation
>> for Rhino at
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/sling/trunk/bundles/scripting/javascript/
>> - sling seems to indicate that JDK 5 is okay, so I am not sure what
>> they are doing.
>>
>> What do people think of saying that fulcrum-script is a JDK 6+
>> component? fulcrum-bsf/fulcrum-groovy could be retained in some form
>> to support JDK< 6 (note that there is chatter about a new release of
>> BSF).
>>
>> Of course if Siegfried can convince the JSR-223 spec lead to release a
>> stand alone update to the javax.script API then fulcrum-script should
>> be able to use it to support JDK< 6, but until then... (can JDK 1.4
>> code pass vararg arguments such as Object... as Object[]?)
>>
>> I have patches here to update fulcrum-script to work with JDK 6, but I
>> won't commit them without comment from Siegfried.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>
>>> some historical background
>>>
>>> +) I needed a scripting integration for one of my products
>>> +) I had a look at BSF and found it largely deserted
>>> +) I wrote fulcrum-groovy but groovy was never stable enough for
>>> production usage
>>> +) I discovered the brand new JSR-223 and it gives me a script
>>> compile functionality to improve performance ... yippie
>>> +) Sun still worked on the JSR-223 spec (being part of JDK 1.6) and
>>> provided samples and libraries to be downloaded
>>> +) I got fulcrum-script it running in this ver early state
>>> (pre-final) using JavaScript and Groovy
>>> +) unfortunately Sun made a last minute change to the final Spec
>>> +) I got in touch with the JSR-223 spec lead and he told me that Sun
>>> might publish a final javax.script library to be used with JDK 1.4
>>>
>>> Soo far so good
>>>
>>> +) I downloaded the final spec and they have an updated javax.script
>>> +) I have a look to see if it is working somehow under with fulcrum
>>> and JDK 1.4
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thomas Vandahl wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>
>>>> My understanding of the intention of fucrum-script is that it
>>>> supports all JSR-223 implementations of scripting engines. Would
>>>> that be a true replacement for the other scripting components? I
>>>> would like to get rid of them then. Your comments are welcomed.
>>>> Especially Siegfrieds as we already talked about the subject but I
>>>> cannot remember the outcome...
>>>>
>>>> Bye, Thomas.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
Re: Fulcrum components bsf and groovy obsoleted by script?
Posted by Scott Eade <se...@apache.org>.
Siegfried,
Any movement in sight on fulcrum-script?
Cheers,
Scott
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 7:34 AM, Siegfried Goeschl
<si...@it20one.at> wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> I committed my changes but I need to do a couple of other fulcrum releases
> ...
>
> Cheers,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
> On 23.04.10 15:30, Scott Eade wrote:
>>
>> <gentle>ping</gentle>
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> On 6/05/2009 3:26 AM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Scott,
>>>
>>> thanks for the gentle reminder ...
>>>
>>> +) I have an updated version based on the final JSR-223 release (but not
>>> committed) that works for Groovy and Rhino
>>> +) this implementation is already using the libraries from
>>> https://scripting.dev.java.net/
>>> +) the main problem I had is supporting JDK 1.5 which I solved at
>>> ApacheCon - the non-released bsf-api-3.0 is an ASF implementation for
>>> JSR-223
>>> +) so fulcrum-script is a JDK1.5+ component
>>>
>>> So the only thing which stopped me from committing is that the various
>>> ScriptEngine (Groovy, Rhino) implementation are not on any M2 repo - I
>>> currently keep them in a lib directory and tell M2 to pick them up from
>>> there. BTW, I'm pretty sure that https://scripting.dev.java.net/ was
>>> not BSD licenced a while ago.
>>>
>>> Anyway - how to handle the ScriptEngine libraries
>>>
>>> +) M2 repo upload request but there are no official releases for the
>>> them ... :-(
>>> +) put them in our SVN repo in a "lib" directory with PMC blessing
>>>
>>> And the unreleased BSF libraries ...
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>>
>>> PS: I have already two kids sitting on my lap - need a break
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> PS: Many thanks to Felix Meschberger regarding BSF
>>>
>>> Scott Eade wrote:
>>>>
>>>> It appears that JSR-223 is bit of a mixed bag.
>>>>
>>>> As Siegfried has said below there were changes to the spec between its
>>>> 1.0 release and its inclusion in JDK 6:
>>>>
>>>> * Namespace was renamed to Bindings
>>>> * SimpleNamespace became SimpleBindings
>>>> * Invocable.invoke() methods became Invocable.invokeFunction(String
>>>> Object...) and Invocable.invokeMethod(Object, String Object...)
>>>> [note the use of varargs]
>>>> * there may be one or two other small changes.
>>>>
>>>> You can download a bunch of ScriptEngine implementations from
>>>> https://scripting.dev.java.net/ - I presume these all work with JDK 6,
>>>> certainly the JavaScript one does. Note that JDK 6 on Windows
>>>> includes Rhino and the com.sun.script implementation of ScriptEngine,
>>>> but since scripting engines are optional you cannot actually rely on
>>>> this being present (e.g. JDK 6 on OS X does not come with Rhino). To
>>>> use Rhino on OS X with JDK 6 you need the java.net ScriptEngine
>>>> implementation (which comes in a package named com.sun.phobos.script
>>>> and appears to work nicely with a standard Rhino download). The
>>>> java.net implementation is not available in a maven repository (though
>>>> it is BSD licensed and is not a huge amount of code).
>>>>
>>>> AFAICT there is no stand alone version of javax.script that has been
>>>> updated to reflect the above changes so as to support JDK versions
>>>> prior to 6. I did come across an Apache ScriptEngine implementation
>>>> for Rhino at
>>>>
>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/sling/trunk/bundles/scripting/javascript/
>>>>
>>>> - sling seems to indicate that JDK 5 is okay, so I am not sure what
>>>> they are doing.
>>>>
>>>> What do people think of saying that fulcrum-script is a JDK 6+
>>>> component? fulcrum-bsf/fulcrum-groovy could be retained in some form
>>>> to support JDK< 6 (note that there is chatter about a new release of
>>>> BSF).
>>>>
>>>> Of course if Siegfried can convince the JSR-223 spec lead to release a
>>>> stand alone update to the javax.script API then fulcrum-script should
>>>> be able to use it to support JDK< 6, but until then... (can JDK 1.4
>>>> code pass vararg arguments such as Object... as Object[]?)
>>>>
>>>> I have patches here to update fulcrum-script to work with JDK 6, but I
>>>> won't commit them without comment from Siegfried.
>>>>
>>>> Scott
>>>>
>>>> Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>>>
>>>>> some historical background
>>>>>
>>>>> +) I needed a scripting integration for one of my products
>>>>> +) I had a look at BSF and found it largely deserted
>>>>> +) I wrote fulcrum-groovy but groovy was never stable enough for
>>>>> production usage
>>>>> +) I discovered the brand new JSR-223 and it gives me a script
>>>>> compile functionality to improve performance ... yippie
>>>>> +) Sun still worked on the JSR-223 spec (being part of JDK 1.6) and
>>>>> provided samples and libraries to be downloaded
>>>>> +) I got fulcrum-script it running in this ver early state
>>>>> (pre-final) using JavaScript and Groovy
>>>>> +) unfortunately Sun made a last minute change to the final Spec
>>>>> +) I got in touch with the JSR-223 spec lead and he told me that Sun
>>>>> might publish a final javax.script library to be used with JDK 1.4
>>>>>
>>>>> Soo far so good
>>>>>
>>>>> +) I downloaded the final spec and they have an updated javax.script
>>>>> +) I have a look to see if it is working somehow under with fulcrum
>>>>> and JDK 1.4
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Thomas Vandahl wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My understanding of the intention of fucrum-script is that it
>>>>>> supports all JSR-223 implementations of scripting engines. Would
>>>>>> that be a true replacement for the other scripting components? I
>>>>>> would like to get rid of them then. Your comments are welcomed.
>>>>>> Especially Siegfrieds as we already talked about the subject but I
>>>>>> cannot remember the outcome...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Bye, Thomas.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
Re: Fulcrum components bsf and groovy obsoleted by script?
Posted by Siegfried Goeschl <si...@it20one.at>.
Hi Scott,
I committed my changes but I need to do a couple of other fulcrum
releases ...
Cheers,
Siegfried Goeschl
On 23.04.10 15:30, Scott Eade wrote:
> <gentle>ping</gentle>
>
> Scott
>
> On 6/05/2009 3:26 AM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>> Hi Scott,
>>
>> thanks for the gentle reminder ...
>>
>> +) I have an updated version based on the final JSR-223 release (but not
>> committed) that works for Groovy and Rhino
>> +) this implementation is already using the libraries from
>> https://scripting.dev.java.net/
>> +) the main problem I had is supporting JDK 1.5 which I solved at
>> ApacheCon - the non-released bsf-api-3.0 is an ASF implementation for
>> JSR-223
>> +) so fulcrum-script is a JDK1.5+ component
>>
>> So the only thing which stopped me from committing is that the various
>> ScriptEngine (Groovy, Rhino) implementation are not on any M2 repo - I
>> currently keep them in a lib directory and tell M2 to pick them up from
>> there. BTW, I'm pretty sure that https://scripting.dev.java.net/ was
>> not BSD licenced a while ago.
>>
>> Anyway - how to handle the ScriptEngine libraries
>>
>> +) M2 repo upload request but there are no official releases for the
>> them ... :-(
>> +) put them in our SVN repo in a "lib" directory with PMC blessing
>>
>> And the unreleased BSF libraries ...
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>
>> PS: I have already two kids sitting on my lap - need a break
>>
>>
>>
>> PS: Many thanks to Felix Meschberger regarding BSF
>>
>> Scott Eade wrote:
>>> It appears that JSR-223 is bit of a mixed bag.
>>>
>>> As Siegfried has said below there were changes to the spec between its
>>> 1.0 release and its inclusion in JDK 6:
>>>
>>> * Namespace was renamed to Bindings
>>> * SimpleNamespace became SimpleBindings
>>> * Invocable.invoke() methods became Invocable.invokeFunction(String
>>> Object...) and Invocable.invokeMethod(Object, String Object...)
>>> [note the use of varargs]
>>> * there may be one or two other small changes.
>>>
>>> You can download a bunch of ScriptEngine implementations from
>>> https://scripting.dev.java.net/ - I presume these all work with JDK 6,
>>> certainly the JavaScript one does. Note that JDK 6 on Windows
>>> includes Rhino and the com.sun.script implementation of ScriptEngine,
>>> but since scripting engines are optional you cannot actually rely on
>>> this being present (e.g. JDK 6 on OS X does not come with Rhino). To
>>> use Rhino on OS X with JDK 6 you need the java.net ScriptEngine
>>> implementation (which comes in a package named com.sun.phobos.script
>>> and appears to work nicely with a standard Rhino download). The
>>> java.net implementation is not available in a maven repository (though
>>> it is BSD licensed and is not a huge amount of code).
>>>
>>> AFAICT there is no stand alone version of javax.script that has been
>>> updated to reflect the above changes so as to support JDK versions
>>> prior to 6. I did come across an Apache ScriptEngine implementation
>>> for Rhino at
>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/sling/trunk/bundles/scripting/javascript/
>>>
>>> - sling seems to indicate that JDK 5 is okay, so I am not sure what
>>> they are doing.
>>>
>>> What do people think of saying that fulcrum-script is a JDK 6+
>>> component? fulcrum-bsf/fulcrum-groovy could be retained in some form
>>> to support JDK< 6 (note that there is chatter about a new release of
>>> BSF).
>>>
>>> Of course if Siegfried can convince the JSR-223 spec lead to release a
>>> stand alone update to the javax.script API then fulcrum-script should
>>> be able to use it to support JDK< 6, but until then... (can JDK 1.4
>>> code pass vararg arguments such as Object... as Object[]?)
>>>
>>> I have patches here to update fulcrum-script to work with JDK 6, but I
>>> won't commit them without comment from Siegfried.
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>>
>>>> some historical background
>>>>
>>>> +) I needed a scripting integration for one of my products
>>>> +) I had a look at BSF and found it largely deserted
>>>> +) I wrote fulcrum-groovy but groovy was never stable enough for
>>>> production usage
>>>> +) I discovered the brand new JSR-223 and it gives me a script
>>>> compile functionality to improve performance ... yippie
>>>> +) Sun still worked on the JSR-223 spec (being part of JDK 1.6) and
>>>> provided samples and libraries to be downloaded
>>>> +) I got fulcrum-script it running in this ver early state
>>>> (pre-final) using JavaScript and Groovy
>>>> +) unfortunately Sun made a last minute change to the final Spec
>>>> +) I got in touch with the JSR-223 spec lead and he told me that Sun
>>>> might publish a final javax.script library to be used with JDK 1.4
>>>>
>>>> Soo far so good
>>>>
>>>> +) I downloaded the final spec and they have an updated javax.script
>>>> +) I have a look to see if it is working somehow under with fulcrum
>>>> and JDK 1.4
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thomas Vandahl wrote:
>>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>>
>>>>> My understanding of the intention of fucrum-script is that it
>>>>> supports all JSR-223 implementations of scripting engines. Would
>>>>> that be a true replacement for the other scripting components? I
>>>>> would like to get rid of them then. Your comments are welcomed.
>>>>> Especially Siegfrieds as we already talked about the subject but I
>>>>> cannot remember the outcome...
>>>>>
>>>>> Bye, Thomas.
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org