You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@velocity.apache.org by lloyd <su...@twilight-systems.com> on 2002/05/04 22:40:20 UTC
limiting access to a context object's methods
often, a have an existing object that i'd like to give a template
designer access to, but i'd like to restrict the methods that are
available to him.
what's the best way to do this?
factor the object into readable and writeable classes?
define an interface and implement it in the object?
create a wrapper class?
i'm not sure i like any of these approaches. in the first two they
require changes to the design of every object. the second one requires
a rather tedious and redundant-feeling exercise for each object.
is a generic velocity facility available that allows the developer to
choose which methods are available to the designer?
or, in lieu of that, i'll take an extended discussion about why that
idea is bad and why one of the other options (or another) is better :-)
ps -
<flamebait>
my designer still doesn't understand what's so damn special about
decimal points that velocity can't support them in VTL :-)
</flamebait>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Ken Anderson <ka...@pacific.net>.
Terry Steichen wrote:
>
>I for one would greatly appreciate it if you would 'butt out' of this list.
>
>
>
>
+1
This is not a 'template engines' list.
We know about Freemarker already. Be gone!
Ken Anderson
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
bob mcwhirter wrote:
> Okay, that's quite enough. Take it elsewhere guys.
>
> -bob
> (wondering why this is on the velocity list...)
>
> On Mon, 6 May 2002, Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>
>
>>Fuck you, you little bastard.
>>Now, you listen to me, you little lying dweeb dipshit.
>>Fuck you, you little dipshit bastard.
>>Okay, you little bastard.
In the text above, Geir I was reacting to Geir's insinuation that I did
not write the Niggle framework and was illegitimately taking credit for it.
We're not taking this elsewhere. Geir is going to have to retract that
statement on this same list where he made the insinuations. This is just
not right.
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by bob mcwhirter <bo...@werken.com>.
Okay, that's quite enough. Take it elsewhere guys.
-bob
(wondering why this is on the velocity list...)
On Mon, 6 May 2002, Jonathan Revusky wrote:
> Fuck you, you little bastard.
> Now, you listen to me, you little lying dweeb dipshit.
> Fuck you, you little dipshit bastard.
> Okay, you little bastard.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Charles N. Harvey III wrote:
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Jonathan Revusky [mailto:jrevusky@terra.es]
>>Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2002 9:09 PM
>>To: Velocity Users List
>
> [snip]
>
>>Look, I am the sole author. A guy may have sent me a bugfix patch here
>>and there. There might be someone who made a suggestion that was good
>>and I acted on it. People have made an nth order contribution here and
>>there. Niggle is roughly 10,000 LOC and there is probably not much more
>>than 100 lines written by anybody else. Nobody has made a significant
>>enough contribution that you could seriously say they were a co-author.
>>Thus, I am the sole author.
>
>
>
> The thing is, that nobody cares.
That's not true. I care. I am the author and it was being insinuated
that I am not.
> As long as the product, support and
> documentation are good nobody cares if it is developed by one person
> or a crowd of a thousand. Nobody is trying to take any credit away from
> you.
> We just want the flood of e-mails to stop.
I have stated how to stop it. I told Geir to retract the insinuation
that I did not write Niggle. He clearly went over the line there. You
just don't go there.
Once I'm satisfied that he's retracted it, I unsubscribe for good.
He just has to humbly admit that that was wrong, with no verbal
gamesmanship, and then I'm out of here. You all have my word.
Regards,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web applications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by "Charles N. Harvey III" <ch...@alloy.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Revusky [mailto:jrevusky@terra.es]
> Sent: Sunday, May 05, 2002 9:09 PM
> To: Velocity Users List
[snip]
> Look, I am the sole author. A guy may have sent me a bugfix patch here
> and there. There might be someone who made a suggestion that was good
> and I acted on it. People have made an nth order contribution here and
> there. Niggle is roughly 10,000 LOC and there is probably not much more
> than 100 lines written by anybody else. Nobody has made a significant
> enough contribution that you could seriously say they were a co-author.
> Thus, I am the sole author.
The thing is, that nobody cares. As long as the product, support and
documentation are good nobody cares if it is developed by one person
or a crowd of a thousand. Nobody is trying to take any credit away from
you.
We just want the flood of e-mails to stop.
Charlie
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On 5/5/02 7:19 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
>
>>Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>On 5/5/02 4:30 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On 5/5/02 3:25 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>The MVC framework in question is Niggle at http://niggle.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I am the author of that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>LOL. You are not the sole author. Give credit where credit's due...
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Well, pretty much. Objectively, Niggle is at least 98% my work and
>>>>that's a conservative estimate. The core ideas embodied, like using
>>>>immutable records, were mine.
>>>
>>>
>>>You invented immutable records?
>>
> [SNIP]
>
> Please, avoid this language on the list. There is *no* place for it here.
>
>
>>I had the idea of basing the Niggle
>>library around immutable records. I did not invent the concept of
>>immutable records themselves.
>
>
> Oh, my mistake then. I thought you were saying that the core idea of
> immutable records was yours. I figured it went back to early mainframes...
You didn't think that. Stop lying.
>
>
>>Now, you listen to me, you little lying dweeb dipshit. This has all been
>>fun and games. I've been tweaking your nose a bit, I admit, and you want
>>to get back at me.
>
>
> Actually, I don't want to 'get back' at you.
Stop lying.
>
> Velocity community - I apologize to you for goading him on this.
>
> Smarter people than I (most, I suspect) warned me not to, and while I
> ignored many if not most of his insults about me, Velocity, Jakarta, the ASF
> and the communities therein to just pass, the idea of him being the sole
> author of Niggle didn't sit quite with me, so I had to ask. He agreed that
> he wasn't.
Look, I am the sole author. A guy may have sent me a bugfix patch here
and there. There might be someone who made a suggestion that was good
and I acted on it. People have made an nth order contribution here and
there. Niggle is roughly 10,000 LOC and there is probably not much more
than 100 lines written by anybody else. Nobody has made a significant
enough contribution that you could seriously say they were a co-author.
Thus, I am the sole author.
Niggle is a relatively small community, but the people there know who I
am and they know who wrote the code. You know who wrote the code and
you're playing slimey semantic games to insinuate something.
You were making slimy insinuations that suggested that I was taking
credit for other people's work.
>
> I will do my best to end participation in this thread.
If this is your best, it's not good enough. I want a retraction. It was
wrong to insinuate that I did not write Niggle, when you know damn well
I did. Just humbly admit the mistake and we're through.
> In other messages,
> JR is claiming that I said he "did not write the Niggle framework and was
> illegitimately taking credit for it." What I actually said was
>
>
>>>>LOL. You are not the sole author. Give credit where credit's due...
>>>>
>>>
>>>Well, pretty much. Objectively, Niggle is at least 98% my work and
>>>that's a conservative estimate. The core ideas embodied, like using
>>>immutable records, were mine.
>>
>>
>>You invented immutable records?
>
>
> I don't want to continue this. It's gone way further than I imagined it
> could have.
>
> It's clear that JR was involved with creating the Niggle framework,
I was not just "involved" with creating the Niggle framework. I wrote
the fucking thing!!! Everybody damn well knows that!
I do not make a similar claim about FreeMarker. Benjamin Geer wrote
FreeMarker 1, other people contributed. I rewrote the core of the
template engine for FreeMarker 2. But I am not the sole author.
The history of the FreeMarker project is on the FreeMarker website and
the history of the Niggle project is on the Niggle website. I wrote the
text in both cases and the text is truthful.
> and that
> he clearly is the project lead and maintainer now, so if anyone had any
> questions about his fine character and honor, I apologize for any
> insinuations of mine that might have led you to negative conclusions.
Don't play at being a clever lawyer with me, little boy. I wrote the
fucking thing and you were insinuating that I was lying about that. I
want a retraction.
>
> As always, this has been a sincere displeasure on my part as well as a
> glorious waste of precious time, mine and everyones. To everyone, I
> apologize for that too.
>
> I would rather be talking about templating and Velocity.
>
> I am hoping we can return to fighting about '+' vs '&' vs ':'.
I want an unconditional retraction of this bullshit. I gave my word that
I would unsubscribe from this list for good once I received a
satisfactory retraction.
I even apologized for my provocative behavior. I took the first step.
You have a very easy route. Don't be stupid, Geir. Take the easy way. It
was just plain wrong to insinuate that I was taking credit for other
people's work. I did write Niggle.
>
> :)
>
Fuck your little smiley. I'm not smiling. I am extremely pissed off.
:-(
--
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web applications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's
methods)
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/5/02 7:19 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> On 5/5/02 4:30 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/5/02 3:25 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The MVC framework in question is Niggle at http://niggle.org/
>>>>>
>>>>> I am the author of that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> LOL. You are not the sole author. Give credit where credit's due...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, pretty much. Objectively, Niggle is at least 98% my work and
>>> that's a conservative estimate. The core ideas embodied, like using
>>> immutable records, were mine.
>>
>>
>> You invented immutable records?
>
[SNIP]
Please, avoid this language on the list. There is *no* place for it here.
> I had the idea of basing the Niggle
> library around immutable records. I did not invent the concept of
> immutable records themselves.
Oh, my mistake then. I thought you were saying that the core idea of
immutable records was yours. I figured it went back to early mainframes...
> Now, you listen to me, you little lying dweeb dipshit. This has all been
> fun and games. I've been tweaking your nose a bit, I admit, and you want
> to get back at me.
Actually, I don't want to 'get back' at you.
Velocity community - I apologize to you for goading him on this.
Smarter people than I (most, I suspect) warned me not to, and while I
ignored many if not most of his insults about me, Velocity, Jakarta, the ASF
and the communities therein to just pass, the idea of him being the sole
author of Niggle didn't sit quite with me, so I had to ask. He agreed that
he wasn't.
I will do my best to end participation in this thread. In other messages,
JR is claiming that I said he "did not write the Niggle framework and was
illegitimately taking credit for it." What I actually said was
>>>LOL. You are not the sole author. Give credit where credit's due...
>>>
>>
>>Well, pretty much. Objectively, Niggle is at least 98% my work and
>>that's a conservative estimate. The core ideas embodied, like using
>>immutable records, were mine.
>
>
> You invented immutable records?
I don't want to continue this. It's gone way further than I imagined it
could have.
It's clear that JR was involved with creating the Niggle framework, and that
he clearly is the project lead and maintainer now, so if anyone had any
questions about his fine character and honor, I apologize for any
insinuations of mine that might have led you to negative conclusions.
As always, this has been a sincere displeasure on my part as well as a
glorious waste of precious time, mine and everyones. To everyone, I
apologize for that too.
I would rather be talking about templating and Velocity.
I am hoping we can return to fighting about '+' vs '&' vs ':'.
:)
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On 5/5/02 4:30 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
>
>>Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>On 5/5/02 3:25 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Stéphane MOR wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>He did not seem to realize that I am the author of a modestly well
>>>>>>known MVC web framework.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>You're not. You stated that in one of your endless, pointless emails :
>>>>>03/05/02 : "I have been FreeMarker's lead developer for a little over 2
>>>>>months."
>>>>>Is Freemarker "a little over 2 months" old ?
>>>>
>>>>Salut, Stéphane.
>>>>
>>>>FreeMarker is a template engine, not an MVC framework.
>>>>
>>>>The MVC framework in question is Niggle at http://niggle.org/
>>>>
>>>>I am the author of that.
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>LOL. You are not the sole author. Give credit where credit's due...
>>>
>>
>>Well, pretty much. Objectively, Niggle is at least 98% my work and
>>that's a conservative estimate. The core ideas embodied, like using
>>immutable records, were mine.
>
>
> You invented immutable records?
Fuck you, you little bastard. I had the idea of basing the Niggle
library around immutable records. I did not invent the concept of
immutable records themselves.
Now, you listen to me, you little lying dweeb dipshit. This has all been
fun and games. I've been tweaking your nose a bit, I admit, and you want
to get back at me.
Congratulations, you have finally managed to provoke me. The problem is
that this is slander. So listen carefully. You're going to retract these
insinuations below or this is going to get *very* nasty.
>
> LOL. Time for your meds, it seems.
Fuck you, you little dipshit bastard.
>
>>Pretty much all of the code that is there
>>is by me. All of the API was designed by me. And the implementing
>>classes. The project is maintained by me.
>
>
> I think that the last sentence is the only one that can't be argued with.
> As for the rest, it would be an interesting discussion to explore this
> subject, had I the interest.
Okay, you little bastard. You are going to retract the above. You stated
this in public and you are going to fucking retract it in public.
>
>>Quite frankly, I wish Niggle wasn't a one-man show to the extent that it
>>is. I wish more of it were written by other people. But that is simply
>>not the case currently.
>>
>>What's strange about this is that in an exchange that does credit to
>>neither of us particularly, you referred to Niggle in a denigrating
>>fashion as my "personal attempt at a web app framework." That's the
>>message below.
>>
>>http://spitfire.velocet.net/pipermail/webmacro/2001-November/007288.html
>>
>>What I infer now is that you've looked at it and realize that it's
>>pretty good and are now taking issue with my saying that it's my work.
>>"Couldn't possibly be Revusky's work... it's too damn good..." <mutter>
>><mutter> ;-)
>
>
> No, you are a genius. I recognize that. We all do.
>
> I just know some of the niggle background, and it doesn't sync with how I am
> interpreting your words here. Must be my mistake in interpretation. ;)
Listen to me good. You don't know shit about the niggle background. I
know you don't because I wrote it. And I know you weren't there when I
wrote it.
You are making insinuations about my character and my honor now. I am
abrasive and I don't suffer fools gladly, but you are now insinuating
that I took credit for work that I did not do.
I did not realize that you were this unstable and I guess my fun and
games have pushed you over the edge. I'll make a deal. You retract these
mendacious insinuations right now and I will unsubscribe from this
mailing list immediately if that's what you prefer. I had little
intention of hanging around here much longer anyway.
If you don't retract it, then you're just looking for trouble. And
you'll have found it.
Make your decision.
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's
methods)
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/5/02 4:30 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> On 5/5/02 3:25 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Stéphane MOR wrote:
>>>
>>>> Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> He did not seem to realize that I am the author of a modestly well
>>>>> known MVC web framework.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You're not. You stated that in one of your endless, pointless emails :
>>>> 03/05/02 : "I have been FreeMarker's lead developer for a little over 2
>>>> months."
>>>> Is Freemarker "a little over 2 months" old ?
>>>
>>> Salut, Stéphane.
>>>
>>> FreeMarker is a template engine, not an MVC framework.
>>>
>>> The MVC framework in question is Niggle at http://niggle.org/
>>>
>>> I am the author of that.
>>>
>>
>>
>> LOL. You are not the sole author. Give credit where credit's due...
>>
>
> Well, pretty much. Objectively, Niggle is at least 98% my work and
> that's a conservative estimate. The core ideas embodied, like using
> immutable records, were mine.
You invented immutable records?
LOL. Time for your meds, it seems.
> Pretty much all of the code that is there
> is by me. All of the API was designed by me. And the implementing
> classes. The project is maintained by me.
I think that the last sentence is the only one that can't be argued with.
As for the rest, it would be an interesting discussion to explore this
subject, had I the interest.
>
> Quite frankly, I wish Niggle wasn't a one-man show to the extent that it
> is. I wish more of it were written by other people. But that is simply
> not the case currently.
>
> What's strange about this is that in an exchange that does credit to
> neither of us particularly, you referred to Niggle in a denigrating
> fashion as my "personal attempt at a web app framework." That's the
> message below.
>
> http://spitfire.velocet.net/pipermail/webmacro/2001-November/007288.html
>
> What I infer now is that you've looked at it and realize that it's
> pretty good and are now taking issue with my saying that it's my work.
> "Couldn't possibly be Revusky's work... it's too damn good..." <mutter>
> <mutter> ;-)
No, you are a genius. I recognize that. We all do.
I just know some of the niggle background, and it doesn't sync with how I am
interpreting your words here. Must be my mistake in interpretation. ;)
geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On 5/5/02 3:25 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
>
>>Stéphane MOR wrote:
>>
>>>Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>He did not seem to realize that I am the author of a modestly well
>>>>known MVC web framework.
>>>
>>>
>>>You're not. You stated that in one of your endless, pointless emails :
>>>03/05/02 : "I have been FreeMarker's lead developer for a little over 2
>>>months."
>>>Is Freemarker "a little over 2 months" old ?
>>
>>Salut, Stéphane.
>>
>>FreeMarker is a template engine, not an MVC framework.
>>
>>The MVC framework in question is Niggle at http://niggle.org/
>>
>>I am the author of that.
>>
>
>
> LOL. You are not the sole author. Give credit where credit's due...
>
Well, pretty much. Objectively, Niggle is at least 98% my work and
that's a conservative estimate. The core ideas embodied, like using
immutable records, were mine. Pretty much all of the code that is there
is by me. All of the API was designed by me. And the implementing
classes. The project is maintained by me.
Quite frankly, I wish Niggle wasn't a one-man show to the extent that it
is. I wish more of it were written by other people. But that is simply
not the case currently.
What's strange about this is that in an exchange that does credit to
neither of us particularly, you referred to Niggle in a denigrating
fashion as my "personal attempt at a web app framework." That's the
message below.
http://spitfire.velocet.net/pipermail/webmacro/2001-November/007288.html
What I infer now is that you've looked at it and realize that it's
pretty good and are now taking issue with my saying that it's my work.
"Couldn't possibly be Revusky's work... it's too damn good..." <mutter>
<mutter> ;-)
Geir, you don't seem to know whether you're coming or going.
<sigh>
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web applications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's
methods)
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/5/02 3:25 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
> Stéphane MOR wrote:
>> Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>>
>>> He did not seem to realize that I am the author of a modestly well
>>> known MVC web framework.
>>
>>
>> You're not. You stated that in one of your endless, pointless emails :
>> 03/05/02 : "I have been FreeMarker's lead developer for a little over 2
>> months."
>> Is Freemarker "a little over 2 months" old ?
>
> Salut, Stéphane.
>
> FreeMarker is a template engine, not an MVC framework.
>
> The MVC framework in question is Niggle at http://niggle.org/
>
> I am the author of that.
>
LOL. You are not the sole author. Give credit where credit's due...
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's
methods)
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/5/02 3:35 PM, "Stéphane MOR" <st...@yahoo.fr> wrote:
> Salut,
>
> OK, so a new thread called "Objective Comparison between Freemarker and
> Velocity" would be a better idea .
Instead of a thread, which will probably turn into a flamefest anyway, why
not a post on the Freemarker website? We can do our response here.
Then, we don't fill people mailboxes with the stuff, anyone who is
interested can go look, and the arguments can be made w/o the chance of fire
breaking out again...
I'm game.
>
> There is probably a need for people to know what other solutions are
> available, but all this flaming deserves
> neither Freemarker nor Velocity.
>
> Both projects can cohabit (I guess that Freemarker is supported by
> Niggle in the same way that Velocity is
> supported by Turbine - as Freemarker formerly was ).
Niggle supports Velocity too - it's on our powered-by page :)
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Stéphane MOR <st...@yahoo.fr>.
Salut,
OK, so a new thread called "Objective Comparison between Freemarker and
Velocity" would be a better idea .
There is probably a need for people to know what other solutions are
available, but all this flaming deserves
neither Freemarker nor Velocity.
Both projects can cohabit (I guess that Freemarker is supported by
Niggle in the same way that Velocity is
supported by Turbine - as Freemarker formerly was ).
Why not try and improve each other ?
This can only be done with objectivity .
Geir is leading Velocity's development, and you are leading Freemarker's
development, so subjectivity is on
schedule ! ;-)
Hoping that eveyone can stop insulting each other,
Stéphane
_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Stéphane MOR wrote:
> Jonathan Revusky wrote:
>
>> He did not seem to realize that I am the author of a modestly well
>> known MVC web framework.
>
>
> You're not. You stated that in one of your endless, pointless emails :
> 03/05/02 : "I have been FreeMarker's lead developer for a little over 2
> months."
> Is Freemarker "a little over 2 months" old ?
Salut, Stéphane.
FreeMarker is a template engine, not an MVC framework.
The MVC framework in question is Niggle at http://niggle.org/
I am the author of that.
>
> Why not tell the users on **your** mailing list why not to use Velocity
> and let us alone ?
> This mailing list has always been a very rich source of information for
> me, until that sad
> day (03/05/02) when you started marketing *"*your*"* product on this list.
>
Yes, 2 days ago, yet apparently there has been a lot of flaming over the
past week. I think it's an endemic problem on these lists.
The truth is that it is obnoxious to market a competing product on
somebody else's mailing list. But, since Velocity developers have done
this in the past on other mailing lists, they have no grounds for complaint.
Also, all the people complaining are making matters much worse by trying
to flame me. The one guy flamed me and had so many factual errors in his
flaming that I was *forced* to respond! The problem would be minimized
by not replying.
A+
Jonathan
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Stéphane MOR <st...@yahoo.fr>.
Jonathan Revusky wrote:
> He did not seem to realize that I am the author of a modestly well
> known MVC web framework.
You're not. You stated that in one of your endless, pointless emails :
03/05/02 : "I have been FreeMarker's lead developer for a little over 2
months."
Is Freemarker "a little over 2 months" old ?
Why not tell the users on **your** mailing list why not to use Velocity
and let us alone ?
This mailing list has always been a very rich source of information for
me, until that sad
day (03/05/02) when you started marketing *"*your*"* product on this list.
Bye,
Stéphane
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's
methods)
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/5/02 3:00 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> On 5/5/02 1:42 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>>
>> [SNIP]
>>
>>
>>> I just don't play the game. I don't adopt the appropriate fawning
>>> attitude. Note the accusatory tone with which Geir says that I don't
>>> think much of the ASF.
>>
>>
>> I think it might be that you tend to insult anyone you come into contact
>> with that doesn't agree with you, and do it in a rather long-winded and
>> tiring manner. That's my perception, anyway.
>
> Geir, not that I'm keeping exact score or anything, but I suspect that
> you've insulted me far more times in the last 24 hours than I've
> insulted you.
>
> But anyway, there was a point I wanted to bring up. In an earlier
> message, you speculated that I was using FreeMarker to get back at you,
> and then further, that it wasn't really to get back at you, but to get
> at Jon Stevens and you were kind of a proxy for Jon Stevens.
LOL. That wasn't what I said, and you know it. You are projecting again.
>
> Something like that.
>
> There's something I want to say about this. Is the above not a bit of a
> paranoid delusion? I mean, the sheer amount of work I've put into
> FreeMarker over the past couple of months to put out the Lazarus release
> is quite large. To think that I put in that work just to get at you or
> Jon Stevens verges on the delusional.
I can't say why you did the work. I don't care. You are here for another
reason though...
> I mean, I know that you yourself are important in your own life. (This
> much stands to reason.) But you have to learn to look at this from the
> other guy's point of view. You are simply not important enough to me for
> me to put in that kind of effort on your account. Nor is Jon Stevens.
> Nor is ASF, for that matter.
>
> I put in the work into FreeMarker for the pure pleasure and satisfaction
> of doing it. And yes, there are ulterior motives. I think it will raise
> my professional profile and help me make contacts. It provides a good
> showpiece of my software engineering skills.
>
> But anyway, I don't think you should repeat any of that paranoid
> delusional stuff any more. The appropriate person to bring it up with
> would probably be a mental health professional.
I bet you could recommend one, although clearly not a good one.
>
> Ciao,
>
> Jonathan Revusky
> --
> Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
> Build robust web appications with the
> Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
> Available for Java/Internet Consulting
>
>
> P.S. I fished out the exact quote:
>
> "I suspect that this goes back to your problems with Jon Stevens, and
> since niggle didn't give you a platform to go after Turbine, you are
> using FreeMarker in the same way."
>
So If you had the exact quote, why didn't you go fix the comment above where
you are fantasizing that I think you are trying to get back at me for
something?
Lets drop this. This is stupid...
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On 5/5/02 1:42 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
> [SNIP]
>
>
>>I just don't play the game. I don't adopt the appropriate fawning
>>attitude. Note the accusatory tone with which Geir says that I don't
>>think much of the ASF.
>
>
> I think it might be that you tend to insult anyone you come into contact
> with that doesn't agree with you, and do it in a rather long-winded and
> tiring manner. That's my perception, anyway.
Geir, not that I'm keeping exact score or anything, but I suspect that
you've insulted me far more times in the last 24 hours than I've
insulted you.
But anyway, there was a point I wanted to bring up. In an earlier
message, you speculated that I was using FreeMarker to get back at you,
and then further, that it wasn't really to get back at you, but to get
at Jon Stevens and you were kind of a proxy for Jon Stevens.
Something like that.
There's something I want to say about this. Is the above not a bit of a
paranoid delusion? I mean, the sheer amount of work I've put into
FreeMarker over the past couple of months to put out the Lazarus release
is quite large. To think that I put in that work just to get at you or
Jon Stevens verges on the delusional.
I mean, I know that you yourself are important in your own life. (This
much stands to reason.) But you have to learn to look at this from the
other guy's point of view. You are simply not important enough to me for
me to put in that kind of effort on your account. Nor is Jon Stevens.
Nor is ASF, for that matter.
I put in the work into FreeMarker for the pure pleasure and satisfaction
of doing it. And yes, there are ulterior motives. I think it will raise
my professional profile and help me make contacts. It provides a good
showpiece of my software engineering skills.
But anyway, I don't think you should repeat any of that paranoid
delusional stuff any more. The appropriate person to bring it up with
would probably be a mental health professional.
Ciao,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
P.S. I fished out the exact quote:
"I suspect that this goes back to your problems with Jon Stevens, and
since niggle didn't give you a platform to go after Turbine, you are
using FreeMarker in the same way."
>
>
>
>><sigh>
>>
>>I mean, suppose that's the case. So what? I mean what is happening here
>>is that the jakarta/apache culture is a very aggressive sort of culture
>>where, beneath a veil of phony civility, you have a sort of sneering,
>>sarcastic attitude. There's a kind of intellectual bullying or
>>browbeating that is very commonplace on these lists. I don't like it.
>
>
> I don't agree with your assessment, but, as they say, 'whatever...'
>
>
>
>>The reason I infuriate people is simply because I don't play the game.
>>People cannot stand me because I simply don't put up with any of their
>>bullshit.
>
>
> I know this will be a disappointment, but I think this 'infuriation' is in
> your own mind...
>
>
> [SNIP]
>
>
>>Now, of course, this drives people crazy, I know. :-) But it's all
>>really quite funny. <LOL>
>
>
> And sad, too.
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's
methods)
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/5/02 1:42 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
[SNIP]
> I just don't play the game. I don't adopt the appropriate fawning
> attitude. Note the accusatory tone with which Geir says that I don't
> think much of the ASF.
I think it might be that you tend to insult anyone you come into contact
with that doesn't agree with you, and do it in a rather long-winded and
tiring manner. That's my perception, anyway.
> <sigh>
>
> I mean, suppose that's the case. So what? I mean what is happening here
> is that the jakarta/apache culture is a very aggressive sort of culture
> where, beneath a veil of phony civility, you have a sort of sneering,
> sarcastic attitude. There's a kind of intellectual bullying or
> browbeating that is very commonplace on these lists. I don't like it.
I don't agree with your assessment, but, as they say, 'whatever...'
> The reason I infuriate people is simply because I don't play the game.
> People cannot stand me because I simply don't put up with any of their
> bullshit.
I know this will be a disappointment, but I think this 'infuriation' is in
your own mind...
[SNIP]
>
> Now, of course, this drives people crazy, I know. :-) But it's all
> really quite funny. <LOL>
And sad, too.
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Terry Steichen wrote:
> Jonathan,
>
> [I swore I was going to ignore you. But coudn't resist - just one more
> time....]
>
> Some people think its great fun to create a strawman and then knock it down.
Excuse me. What is the strawman argument in question?
> (Boy, look at me! Aren't I clever/smart/assertive/etc.?) That they're
> wasting everyone else's time and patience doesn't bother them a whit - hey,
> they're having fun.
This is completely ridiculous.
Terry, you are wasting your own time. I cannot put a gun to your head
and force you to waste your time writing silly messages. You are doing
so of your own free will.
>
> The fact that Velocity was derived from WebMacro is, as you say, well known
> and not disputed. No one on this list is arguing with you about that - why
> keep bringing it up?
I pointed it out in a specific context, Velocity's lack of floating
point. The specific reason that Velocity lacks floating point is because
they were copying WebMacro. If you suppose, contrary to fact, that
WebMacro had had floating point, then Velocity would as well, because
they would have copied it. Thus, the main reason Velocity does not have
floating point is because WM didn't. I rest my case.
Geir has claimed that "everybody knows the reasons for Velocity not
having floating point" -- except for me. Maybe he's right. But AFAICT,
the reason Velocity does not have floating point is the one I stated.
>
> Similarly the fact that neither Velocity nor (at least the original)
> WebMacro supports a break directive is also another fact not in disupute.
> Why keep bringing it up?
I brought it up once and somebody saw fit to flame me and my work. He
announced it. This is apparently my fault.
>
> What appears to disturb you (greatly) is that you think this omission is a
> bad thing and Geir does not.
I am not disturbed at all by Velocity's lack of a break instruction.
BTW, does WebMacro have a break instruction?
Anyway, I am indifferent as to whether Velocity has a break instruction,
quite frankly. I simply informed the person asking about it that FM had
that.
> What's the big deal? Can't people
> legitimately disagree, or is it your view that unless you personally believe
> something is right, it's wrong?
People can disagree with me. That's not the issue.
Look, I know what's causing the strife here.
I just don't play the game. I don't adopt the appropriate fawning
attitude. Note the accusatory tone with which Geir says that I don't
think much of the ASF.
<sigh>
I mean, suppose that's the case. So what? I mean what is happening here
is that the jakarta/apache culture is a very aggressive sort of culture
where, beneath a veil of phony civility, you have a sort of sneering,
sarcastic attitude. There's a kind of intellectual bullying or
browbeating that is very commonplace on these lists. I don't like it.
The reason I infuriate people is simply because I don't play the game.
People cannot stand me because I simply don't put up with any of their
bullshit.
In fact, I don't put up with bullshit generally. For example, your
statement that I was wasting *your* time. That's bullshit. You chose to
write the post that I am now replying to of your own free will.
So don't repeat that particular silliness, because I will just point out
that it's bullshit. Really, you should maintain a higher standard of
discourse and not just say anything.
All of this seems reasonable to me. Moreover, I believe you would be
hard pressed to explain why that is not reasonable.
Now, of course, this drives people crazy, I know. :-) But it's all
really quite funny. <LOL>
>
> And as to uncivility, just look at your record on this list of very rude
> comments (more of which I expect in response to this message).
I'm sorry to disappoint you, Terry.
I was somewhat rude to Jonah Benton. However, this is a guy who
announces that he's going to take the opportunity to flame me. He also
lectured me pedantically about what MVC was about. He did not seem to
realize that I am the author of a modestly well known MVC web framework.
He also started lecturing me about where FreeMarker was heading. I
think that it's absurd to suggest that he deserved any better response
than he got from me.
>
> Terry Steichen
>
> PS: You said my labeling of your comments as 'snide' was wrong, because they
> were, in your words, 'factual'. Hmm, facts cannot be expressed in snide
> ways - must be another Revusky-ism?
Sorry, Terry. You said "simply snide" as in "snide, and nothing more".
The comments were more than "simply snide". They were factual and
pertinent to the matter in question.
Cheers,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Terry Steichen <te...@net-frame.com>.
Jonathan,
[I swore I was going to ignore you. But coudn't resist - just one more
time....]
Some people think its great fun to create a strawman and then knock it down.
(Boy, look at me! Aren't I clever/smart/assertive/etc.?) That they're
wasting everyone else's time and patience doesn't bother them a whit - hey,
they're having fun.
The fact that Velocity was derived from WebMacro is, as you say, well known
and not disputed. No one on this list is arguing with you about that - why
keep bringing it up?
Similarly the fact that neither Velocity nor (at least the original)
WebMacro supports a break directive is also another fact not in disupute.
Why keep bringing it up?
What appears to disturb you (greatly) is that you think this omission is a
bad thing and Geir does not. What's the big deal? Can't people
legitimately disagree, or is it your view that unless you personally believe
something is right, it's wrong?
And as to uncivility, just look at your record on this list of very rude
comments (more of which I expect in response to this message).
Terry Steichen
PS: You said my labeling of your comments as 'snide' was wrong, because they
were, in your words, 'factual'. Hmm, facts cannot be expressed in snide
ways - must be another Revusky-ism?
<rest snipped for brevity>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On 5/5/02 11:00 AM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
>
>>Terry Steichen wrote:
>>
>>>Jonathan,
>>>
>>>I've been reading this 'discussion' with something between awe and
>>>revulsion. You are clearly very smart and (I think) knowlegeable. I don't
>>>know much about your FreeMarker project, but I suspect it is pretty good.
>>>
>>>Geir, whatever you think of him (not much, from your comments) is
>>>remarkable. He has the energy of 10 and is also incredibly smart and
>>>eloquent - and *very* helpful to people who ask for help. To label Velocity
>>>as a 'copy-cat' technology is simply snide.
>>
>>I disagree. It's not "simply snide". It's factual. Velocity was
>>consciously created as a WebMacro clone. That much is is not a matter of
>>legitimate debate. It is openly admittedly on the Velocity web pages.
>>Once you know the history of the project, the reason that VTL does not
>>have floating point arithmetic is quite obvious. The thing they were
>>copying did not have floating point. That Geir then wants to represent
>>that this deficiency was a result of some conscious design decision that
>>*they* made -- that, to me, bears a clear whiff of mendacity.
>
>
>
> Set em up and knock em down. Straw everywhere...
You keep claiming that I make straw-man arguments but you are never
specific about what the argument is and why it is a straw-man.
What straw-man argument are you referring to?
>
>
> [SNIP]
>
>>I am being civil with you. Let me review. You have taken issue with my
>>statement that Velocity is, in your paraphrase "a copy-cat technology".
>
>
> It is indeed.
Yep.
>
> We thank the WebMacro community for their pioneering work on our site and
> every place that is appropriate (like articles.)
>
> Freemarker is a copy-cat as well,
Well, hold on. FreeMarker is most certainly not a copy-cat product in
the way Velocity is. It is not the result of anybody sitting down and
consciously writing a tweedledum-tweedledee copy of an existing product.
I have never done such a thing and I would never do that. Well, maybe if
I was paid to do that, I would, but just for the hell of it?
> unless you are going to claim that
> templating didn't exist before Freemarker was created.
The product *category* existed, but it was not written as a conscious
knock-off clone of any existing product.
> And now Freemarker
> has copied the introspection from WebMacro/Velocity, and you are about to
> copy the introspective restriction mechanism from Velocity.
The last part is not true, because I had the idea independently. I
distinctly remember writing Attila Szegedi about it and him telling me
that Velocity was going to have this. And that was the first I heard of it.
In any case, there is a difference between adapting the best ideas that
are floating around and writing a complete knock-off clone of somebody
else's work. I have too much self respect to do something like that and
I also consider that to be in very questionable taste.
Now, you obviously differ and see no problem with cloning other people's
work like that. So, given that, I don't see what the issue is about my
pointing out that that's what you did.
Regards,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
> That's the
> nice thing about this stuff being open source - we all learn and take from
> each other.
>
>
>>However, the statement is factual. Also, the statement was not
>>gratuitous, because I was taking issue with the claim that the lack of
>>floating point in VTL was the result of a conscious design decision on
>>their part. Well, I guess it is true in a *sense* that they made the
>>conscious design decision to omit floating point -- insofar as they made
>>the conscious design decision to copy WebMacro and WebMacro did not have
>>floating point...
>
>
> More straw...
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's
methods)
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/5/02 11:00 AM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
> Terry Steichen wrote:
>> Jonathan,
>>
>> I've been reading this 'discussion' with something between awe and
>> revulsion. You are clearly very smart and (I think) knowlegeable. I don't
>> know much about your FreeMarker project, but I suspect it is pretty good.
>>
>> Geir, whatever you think of him (not much, from your comments) is
>> remarkable. He has the energy of 10 and is also incredibly smart and
>> eloquent - and *very* helpful to people who ask for help. To label Velocity
>> as a 'copy-cat' technology is simply snide.
>
> I disagree. It's not "simply snide". It's factual. Velocity was
> consciously created as a WebMacro clone. That much is is not a matter of
> legitimate debate. It is openly admittedly on the Velocity web pages.
> Once you know the history of the project, the reason that VTL does not
> have floating point arithmetic is quite obvious. The thing they were
> copying did not have floating point. That Geir then wants to represent
> that this deficiency was a result of some conscious design decision that
> *they* made -- that, to me, bears a clear whiff of mendacity.
Set em up and knock em down. Straw everywhere...
[SNIP]
>
> I am being civil with you. Let me review. You have taken issue with my
> statement that Velocity is, in your paraphrase "a copy-cat technology".
It is indeed.
We thank the WebMacro community for their pioneering work on our site and
every place that is appropriate (like articles.)
Freemarker is a copy-cat as well, unless you are going to claim that
templating didn't exist before Freemarker was created. And now Freemarker
has copied the introspection from WebMacro/Velocity, and you are about to
copy the introspective restriction mechanism from Velocity. That's the
nice thing about this stuff being open source - we all learn and take from
each other.
> However, the statement is factual. Also, the statement was not
> gratuitous, because I was taking issue with the claim that the lack of
> floating point in VTL was the result of a conscious design decision on
> their part. Well, I guess it is true in a *sense* that they made the
> conscious design decision to omit floating point -- insofar as they made
> the conscious design decision to copy WebMacro and WebMacro did not have
> floating point...
More straw...
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Terry Steichen wrote:
> Jonathan,
>
> I've been reading this 'discussion' with something between awe and
> revulsion. You are clearly very smart and (I think) knowlegeable. I don't
> know much about your FreeMarker project, but I suspect it is pretty good.
>
> Geir, whatever you think of him (not much, from your comments) is
> remarkable. He has the energy of 10 and is also incredibly smart and
> eloquent - and *very* helpful to people who ask for help. To label Velocity
> as a 'copy-cat' technology is simply snide.
I disagree. It's not "simply snide". It's factual. Velocity was
consciously created as a WebMacro clone. That much is is not a matter of
legitimate debate. It is openly admittedly on the Velocity web pages.
Once you know the history of the project, the reason that VTL does not
have floating point arithmetic is quite obvious. The thing they were
copying did not have floating point. That Geir then wants to represent
that this deficiency was a result of some conscious design decision that
*they* made -- that, to me, bears a clear whiff of mendacity. Only
people who are unaware of the history of the project would take that
statement seriously.
In any case, in one of the recent messages Geir has argued that it is
inappropriate for me to tell somebody that FM has floating point support
and Velocity does not. Why? Because (according to him) the lack of
floating point was a design decision of theirs. Well, does that make any
sense to you? What difference does it make what the reason is? If I say
it does not have that feature and my statement is factual, what is his
grievance?
You know, he's perfectly free to explain his reasons why Vel lacks
floating point. It's probably a FAQ. So here's a potential FAQ entry:
Q. Why doesn't Velocity have floating point arithmetic?
A. WebMacro didn't have it, and we never added it subsequently because
we, in our infinite wisdom, decided that you don't need it. (And don't
ever bring this up, because if you remind us that Vel lacks floating
point, we get angry.)
>
> I am using Velocity, not because I've concluded that it is the best
> technology available, but because it is *very* good and quite acceptable for
> my needs.
You are now at least the second person who feels obliged to justify to
me why they are using Velocity. There is no need, Terry. The psychology
of this is interesting. Why are you doing this?
>
> I for one would greatly appreciate it if you would 'butt out' of this list.
> I'm (and always have been) open to new ideas and new technology - but I have
> limits about how much uncivility I can accept in the process.
Well, from my past experience as a lurker, Jakarta is the wrong to place
to be if you don't like a lack of civility.
I am being civil with you. Let me review. You have taken issue with my
statement that Velocity is, in your paraphrase "a copy-cat technology".
However, the statement is factual. Also, the statement was not
gratuitous, because I was taking issue with the claim that the lack of
floating point in VTL was the result of a conscious design decision on
their part. Well, I guess it is true in a *sense* that they made the
conscious design decision to omit floating point -- insofar as they made
the conscious design decision to copy WebMacro and WebMacro did not have
floating point...
But look, I'm just stating things that I know to be true and I am
stating them in good faith. You might want to examine why that creates
such a problem.
Regards,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Anthony Eden wrote:
> +1
>
> Sincerely,
> Anthony Eden
>
> PS: There must be some sort of cosmic disturbance right now, because I
> have been seeing an inordinate amount of flaming on Jakarta mailing
> lists over the last week.
That's news to me, Anthony. I've only been subscribed to this list for 2
days and I'm not subscribed to any others, yet you speak of the last
week and list(s) in the plural.
Within the first 24 hours, somebody decided they were going to "take the
opportunity to flame freemarker". <shrug> Started lecturing me in a
pedantic way about MVC etcetera.
I think you're right. It probably is a bad alignment of the planets.
I'll bring it up with God next I talk with her.
Ciao,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
> In the immortal words of War: "Why can't we
> be friends?" ;-)
>
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Terry Steichen [mailto:terry@net-frame.com]
>>Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 9:23 PM
>>To: Velocity Users List
>>Subject: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context
>>object's methods)
>>
>>
>>Jonathan,
>>
>>I've been reading this 'discussion' with something between
>>awe and revulsion. You are clearly very smart and (I think)
>>knowlegeable. I don't know much about your FreeMarker
>>project, but I suspect it is pretty good.
>>
>>Geir, whatever you think of him (not much, from your
>>comments) is remarkable. He has the energy of 10 and is also
>>incredibly smart and eloquent - and *very* helpful to people
>>who ask for help. To label Velocity as a 'copy-cat'
>>technology is simply snide.
>>
>>I am using Velocity, not because I've concluded that it is
>>the best technology available, but because it is *very* good
>>and quite acceptable for my needs.
>>
>>I for one would greatly appreciate it if you would 'butt out'
>>of this list. I'm (and always have been) open to new ideas
>>and new technology - but I have limits about how much
>>uncivility I can accept in the process.
>>
>>Terry Steichen
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>><mailto:velocity-user-> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
>>For
>>additional commands,
>>e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
RE: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Anthony Eden <ae...@signaturedomains.com>.
+1
Sincerely,
Anthony Eden
PS: There must be some sort of cosmic disturbance right now, because I
have been seeing an inordinate amount of flaming on Jakarta mailing
lists over the last week. In the immortal words of War: "Why can't we
be friends?" ;-)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Terry Steichen [mailto:terry@net-frame.com]
> Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 9:23 PM
> To: Velocity Users List
> Subject: The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context
> object's methods)
>
>
> Jonathan,
>
> I've been reading this 'discussion' with something between
> awe and revulsion. You are clearly very smart and (I think)
> knowlegeable. I don't know much about your FreeMarker
> project, but I suspect it is pretty good.
>
> Geir, whatever you think of him (not much, from your
> comments) is remarkable. He has the energy of 10 and is also
> incredibly smart and eloquent - and *very* helpful to people
> who ask for help. To label Velocity as a 'copy-cat'
> technology is simply snide.
>
> I am using Velocity, not because I've concluded that it is
> the best technology available, but because it is *very* good
> and quite acceptable for my needs.
>
> I for one would greatly appreciate it if you would 'butt out'
> of this list. I'm (and always have been) open to new ideas
> and new technology - but I have limits about how much
> uncivility I can accept in the process.
>
> Terry Steichen
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <mailto:velocity-user-> unsubscribe@jakarta.apache.org>
> For
> additional commands,
> e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
The Limit (formerly: limiting access to a context object's methods)
Posted by Terry Steichen <te...@net-frame.com>.
Jonathan,
I've been reading this 'discussion' with something between awe and
revulsion. You are clearly very smart and (I think) knowlegeable. I don't
know much about your FreeMarker project, but I suspect it is pretty good.
Geir, whatever you think of him (not much, from your comments) is
remarkable. He has the energy of 10 and is also incredibly smart and
eloquent - and *very* helpful to people who ask for help. To label Velocity
as a 'copy-cat' technology is simply snide.
I am using Velocity, not because I've concluded that it is the best
technology available, but because it is *very* good and quite acceptable for
my needs.
I for one would greatly appreciate it if you would 'butt out' of this list.
I'm (and always have been) open to new ideas and new technology - but I have
limits about how much uncivility I can accept in the process.
Terry Steichen
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On 5/4/02 7:27 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
>
>>Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>Could I offer a suggestion?
>>>
>>>If you are going to shamelessly troll here for users, you might be more
>>>popular with the community if you offered some useful input or discussion
>>>about templating.
>>
>>Well, it's early yet. Just to get an idea of the expectations... let's
>>see...
>>
>>How many incisive statements about templating in general am I expected
>>to make on a given day?
>
>
> Average one per message.
So you'll try to follow the same code, right?
>
>
>>You know, I am a hard worker. I'll try my best to make the quota. You
>>can think of today as me having a rather cold start. :-(
>>
>>I'll try to make up the quota later.
>>
>>
>>>You will make the argument that the crap below is relevant to the Velocity
>>>user list because it's a response to a message about Velocity and mentions
>>>Velocity, but you are smart enough to realize that we can see through this
>>>rather thin excuse.
>>
>>What thin excuse? Anyway, what's this "we" above? Is that the royal "we"?
>
>
> Oh, you are right. I can't speak for others.
Right, you can't. Speak for yourself.
>
> *I* think that you are smart enough to realize I can see through this thin
> excuse, but others who haven't dealt with you for any length of time might
> *not* realize you are that smart.
I don't really know what you're talking about. If you are suggesting
that I am pretending not to be plugging FreeMarker when I obviously am
plugging FreeMarker, you're mistaken.
>
>>You seem to be implying that I'm behaving in a phony, hypocritical way.
>
>
> Well, you are. You have sent two messages that serve no real purpose but to
> adverse FreeMarker and then represent them as useful contribution.
I pointed out facts that could be useful to the person that I was
replying to. That much is certainly true. It is also true that I was
plugging FreeMarker. I do not hide that. I do not engage in that kind of
hypocrisy.
>You even
> responded to someone's parenthetical tease about floating point numbers.
Well, so what?
>
> What's next? Go through the list archives and respond to old messages?
>
> (Oh, I probably shouldn't have given you that idea...)
>
>
>>Nothing of the kind. I am quite unashamedly plugging FreeMarker here. I
>>sincerely believe that FreeMarker is superior to Velocity at this point
>>and I would like people to know about it.
>
>
> Ok. So your point is made. FreeMarker is *vastly* superior to Velocity,
> and is certainly due to your recent effort.
As a matter of fact, I do believe that FM is now vastly superior to
Velocity. It is also true that FM 2.x is mostly my work.
>
>
>>As I have stated before, I had a look at some of the dialogue on the
>>WebMacro mailing list during and after the Velocity/WebMacro schism. On
>>that basis, I have concluded that you -- that is, the Velocity people --
>>are not in a very strong position in terms of suggesting that my current
>>behavior is improper. It's just that now the shoe is on the other foot
>>and you don't like it.
>
>
> Either 'we' is collective or it isn't. Make up your mind.
Well, I don't make a habit of speaking in the name of "the community"
saying that "the community feels this way" or "the community feels that
way" when all I can do is express the way *I* feel. That's illegitimate.
I was simply pointing out that it is comical that this bothers you so
much when Velocity developers have engaged in this very same behavior.
Of course, in the Velocity/WM case, it was more annoying. AFAICS,
copying webmacro's rather ugly syntax was an attempt to cannibalize
their user base.
It was very consciously a copy.
>
> If you understood anything about the subject matter, you might recall the
> 'schism' was based on licensing issues. I know you have little respect for
> Jakarta and the ASF, but the promotion of software under a non-burdening
> license (like the GPL) is one of the primary goals.
I saw the dialogue. It seemed to me that the WM people caved on the
licensing.
>
> I suspect that this goes back to your problems with Jon Stevens, and since
> niggle didn't give you a platform to go after Turbine, you are using
> FreeMarker in the same way.
Well, you're imagining things. I don't have any particular problem with
Jon Stevens. Truth told, I think I actually prefer to have a dialogue
with him than with you. He is openly an asshole, so I can be fully nasty
with him. You come on with a level of phony self-righteousness that I
find very annoying. I am surprised that most people cannot seem to see
through it.
>
> Of course, that's just a suspicion.
Well, even if we supposed for the sake of argument that your above
theory is true, then... so what? What's your point?
>
>
>>You know, poetic justice. :-)
>>
>>Anyway, you're angry at me, right? What's your grievance?
>
>
> I just wish you would calm down, stop calling names or belittling people,
> stop setting up strawmen to demonstrate the superiority of whatever you are
> doing, and discuss actual issues if you are interested.
Well, I do have my faults, but I am meticulously honest in debate. I do
not engage in straw-man arguments.
I am polite to people who are polite to me. If somebody is going to
openly say that he is going to take the opportunity to flame me or my
work, he has to deal with the natural consequences of that.
>
> We *all* know that we don¹t support floating point math in VTL, and we *all*
> (except you) seem to know the reasons.
Oh, I know the reason all right. It's because the thing you copied
didn't have it.
Monkey see. Monkey do.
That much is obvious. To me. In any case, what difference does it make?
If I point out that FM has floating point, what grievance do you have?
You say you have *deliberately* left out floating point. Well, so what?
Suppose, you had just... forgotten... I know that's ridiculous, but in
that case, what difference would it make? I mean, you don't support
floating point and if somebody wants that feature, they can look at an
alternative template solution that has what they want.
This is totally ridiculous, Geir. If I make the conscious decision not
to serve hamburgers in my restaurant, well, if that's what somebody
wants, they can go to Burger King and get what they want. What
difference does it make whether I consciously chose not to serve
hamburgers or unconsciously chose it, or I've run out of hamburger meat.
It's irrelevant to the customer.
>We *all* know that Velocity is
> conservatively managed to ensure backward compatibility out of respect for
> the userbase, but features are constantly being added and things fixed.
>
> I know that can't be said about freemarker.
What is it precisely that can't be said about FreeMarker? I honestly
don't follow you. Some of your discourse above does not seem very logical.
Cheers,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/4/02 7:27 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> Could I offer a suggestion?
>>
>> If you are going to shamelessly troll here for users, you might be more
>> popular with the community if you offered some useful input or discussion
>> about templating.
>
> Well, it's early yet. Just to get an idea of the expectations... let's
> see...
>
> How many incisive statements about templating in general am I expected
> to make on a given day?
Average one per message.
>
> You know, I am a hard worker. I'll try my best to make the quota. You
> can think of today as me having a rather cold start. :-(
>
> I'll try to make up the quota later.
>
>>
>> You will make the argument that the crap below is relevant to the Velocity
>> user list because it's a response to a message about Velocity and mentions
>> Velocity, but you are smart enough to realize that we can see through this
>> rather thin excuse.
>
> What thin excuse? Anyway, what's this "we" above? Is that the royal "we"?
Oh, you are right. I can't speak for others.
*I* think that you are smart enough to realize I can see through this thin
excuse, but others who haven't dealt with you for any length of time might
*not* realize you are that smart.
> You seem to be implying that I'm behaving in a phony, hypocritical way.
Well, you are. You have sent two messages that serve no real purpose but to
adverse FreeMarker and then represent them as useful contribution. You even
responded to someone's parenthetical tease about floating point numbers.
What's next? Go through the list archives and respond to old messages?
(Oh, I probably shouldn't have given you that idea...)
> Nothing of the kind. I am quite unashamedly plugging FreeMarker here. I
> sincerely believe that FreeMarker is superior to Velocity at this point
> and I would like people to know about it.
Ok. So your point is made. FreeMarker is *vastly* superior to Velocity,
and is certainly due to your recent effort.
> As I have stated before, I had a look at some of the dialogue on the
> WebMacro mailing list during and after the Velocity/WebMacro schism. On
> that basis, I have concluded that you -- that is, the Velocity people --
> are not in a very strong position in terms of suggesting that my current
> behavior is improper. It's just that now the shoe is on the other foot
> and you don't like it.
Either 'we' is collective or it isn't. Make up your mind.
If you understood anything about the subject matter, you might recall the
'schism' was based on licensing issues. I know you have little respect for
Jakarta and the ASF, but the promotion of software under a non-burdening
license (like the GPL) is one of the primary goals.
I suspect that this goes back to your problems with Jon Stevens, and since
niggle didn't give you a platform to go after Turbine, you are using
FreeMarker in the same way.
Of course, that's just a suspicion.
>
> You know, poetic justice. :-)
>
> Anyway, you're angry at me, right? What's your grievance?
I just wish you would calm down, stop calling names or belittling people,
stop setting up strawmen to demonstrate the superiority of whatever you are
doing, and discuss actual issues if you are interested.
We *all* know that we don¹t support floating point math in VTL, and we *all*
(except you) seem to know the reasons. We *all* know that Velocity is
conservatively managed to ensure backward compatibility out of respect for
the userbase, but features are constantly being added and things fixed.
I know that can't be said about freemarker.
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> Could I offer a suggestion?
>
> If you are going to shamelessly troll here for users, you might be more
> popular with the community if you offered some useful input or discussion
> about templating.
Well, it's early yet. Just to get an idea of the expectations... let's
see...
How many incisive statements about templating in general am I expected
to make on a given day?
You know, I am a hard worker. I'll try my best to make the quota. You
can think of today as me having a rather cold start. :-(
I'll try to make up the quota later.
>
> You will make the argument that the crap below is relevant to the Velocity
> user list because it's a response to a message about Velocity and mentions
> Velocity, but you are smart enough to realize that we can see through this
> rather thin excuse.
What thin excuse? Anyway, what's this "we" above? Is that the royal "we"?
You seem to be implying that I'm behaving in a phony, hypocritical way.
Nothing of the kind. I am quite unashamedly plugging FreeMarker here. I
sincerely believe that FreeMarker is superior to Velocity at this point
and I would like people to know about it.
As I have stated before, I had a look at some of the dialogue on the
WebMacro mailing list during and after the Velocity/WebMacro schism. On
that basis, I have concluded that you -- that is, the Velocity people --
are not in a very strong position in terms of suggesting that my current
behavior is improper. It's just that now the shoe is on the other foot
and you don't like it.
You know, poetic justice. :-)
Anyway, you're angry at me, right? What's your grievance?
>
> Sound fair? Contribute to the community discussion with something more than
> a plug for your latest pet project, and we can discuss/debate the relative
> merits of Freemarker vs Velocity any time you want.
Well, like I said, it's early yet. I was in something of a conversation
with Jonah about MVC etcetera. Learned a lot of stuff about assembly
lines and Smalltalk and whatnot. Jonah was doing most of the lecturing
though.
I'll try to do better. Really. :-)
Cheers,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
> geir
>
>
> On 5/4/02 6:35 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
>
>>lloyd wrote:
>>
>>><flamebait>
>>>
>>> my designer still doesn't understand what's so damn special about
>>> decimal points that velocity can't support them in VTL :-)
>>>
>>></flamebait>
>>
>>Hi, Lloyd.
>>
>>You might want to take a look at FreeMarker. It fully supports arbitrary
>>precision integer and floating point variables and arithmetic.
>>
>>In fact, as of two releases ago, FreeMarker will use Locale information
>>so that it displays 1.1 as 1,1 in continental Europe -- assuming, of
>>course, you've set right Locale info for your template. You can also set
>>the minimum and maximum digits to display after the decimal point (or
>>comma, case being.)
>>
>>There is also an automatic Velocity->FreeMarker conversion tool
>>available. It handles about 99% of the code I've run it on -- code from
>>the testcases in the Velocity distro.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
Could I offer a suggestion?
If you are going to shamelessly troll here for users, you might be more
popular with the community if you offered some useful input or discussion
about templating.
You will make the argument that the crap below is relevant to the Velocity
user list because it's a response to a message about Velocity and mentions
Velocity, but you are smart enough to realize that we can see through this
rather thin excuse.
Sound fair? Contribute to the community discussion with something more than
a plug for your latest pet project, and we can discuss/debate the relative
merits of Freemarker vs Velocity any time you want.
geir
On 5/4/02 6:35 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
> lloyd wrote:
>>
>> <flamebait>
>>
>> my designer still doesn't understand what's so damn special about
>> decimal points that velocity can't support them in VTL :-)
>>
>> </flamebait>
>
> Hi, Lloyd.
>
> You might want to take a look at FreeMarker. It fully supports arbitrary
> precision integer and floating point variables and arithmetic.
>
> In fact, as of two releases ago, FreeMarker will use Locale information
> so that it displays 1.1 as 1,1 in continental Europe -- assuming, of
> course, you've set right Locale info for your template. You can also set
> the minimum and maximum digits to display after the decimal point (or
> comma, case being.)
>
> There is also an automatic Velocity->FreeMarker conversion tool
> available. It handles about 99% of the code I've run it on -- code from
> the testcases in the Velocity distro.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jonathan Revusky
> --
> Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
> Build robust web appications with the
> Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
> Available for Java/Internet Consulting
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
lloyd wrote:
>
> <flamebait>
>
> my designer still doesn't understand what's so damn special about
> decimal points that velocity can't support them in VTL :-)
>
> </flamebait>
Hi, Lloyd.
You might want to take a look at FreeMarker. It fully supports arbitrary
precision integer and floating point variables and arithmetic.
In fact, as of two releases ago, FreeMarker will use Locale information
so that it displays 1.1 as 1,1 in continental Europe -- assuming, of
course, you've set right Locale info for your template. You can also set
the minimum and maximum digits to display after the decimal point (or
comma, case being.)
There is also an automatic Velocity->FreeMarker conversion tool
available. It handles about 99% of the code I've run it on -- code from
the testcases in the Velocity distro.
Cheers,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by "McLaughlin, Jim" <ji...@stonewatersoftware.com>.
>
> This is OK:
>
> $emp.getPayRate() <-- OK
>
>
> This is NOT OK:
>
> $emp.setIdentity("template designer")
> $emp.setPayRate($emp.getPayRate() * 100)
> $emp.save()
>
I don't think you should look to the templating engine to solve this. You
really need to create a Permission and have the SecurityManager take care
of it.
--
Jim McLaughlin
Software Engineer
Stonewater Software
email: jim@stonewatersoftware.com
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by David Kinnvall <da...@alertir.com>.
Jonathan,
From: "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es>
> David, I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. I did clearly say above that
> "certain people" don't want to hear it. I did not say "all of the
> people" nor did I refer specifically to you.
That is indeed correct. The specific writing did not say
this, but the tone of the message could be, how should I
put it, a bit more diplomatic in places, perhaps?
> Actually, I would imagine that people who are not ego-involved with
> Velocity (most users) would be glad to hear about other things in this
> space.
Probably, if presented in a slightly less confrontational manner.
> > about this type of comparisons, be it with FreeMarker, WebMacro,
> > JSP (yech), XSLT or whatever. The problem seems to be you, and
> > that you knowingly or unknowingly ignore this fact (yes, fact.)
>
> I am glad to hear that you keep a mind open. That's refreshing. This was
> simply not the feedback I had been getting so far. We've also had this
> comical situation where a guy says openly that he's going to take the
> opportunity to flame my work and this is somehow my fault.
Whatever. To avoid further flame-fests, misunderstandings,
off-topic threads and what-not, may I propose the following?
- Keep the more glaring advertisements out of the body text
(I think you are already doing this, as a matter of fact)
- Try to *not* get confrontational, even if provoked (that
is hard but is often worth it)
- Be on-topic and current, as in forgetting the past and
being constructive about the specific problem at hand
By doing this we should all be able to come out of this with
further enhanced tools, in both the FreeMarker and Velocity
camps, and that can't be bad, can it?
Best regards,
David.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
David Kinnvall wrote:
> Dear Jonathan,
>
> You _almost_ made it. Please see below for why not.
>
> From: "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es>
>
>>lloyd wrote:
>>
>>>>Could you clarify your problem a bit.
>>>
>>>Sure:
>>
> [snip]
>
>>I agree with you that a template engine should (at least by default)
>>limit what is available to the template writer. I consider the WebMacro
>>approach of exposing all of an object's public methods -- the approach
>>that was later adopted by Velocity -- to be rather mistaken.
>>
>>In FreeMarker, you can finely control what is available by implementing
>>the TemplateHashModel interface yourself and then you control exactly
>>what is available to the template layer. (Or you can go the full
>>introspection route alternatively, but there's the choice.)
>>
>>If you have further questions, you can write me in private or subscribe
>>to the Freemarker-devel mailing list here:
>>
>>http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
>
>
> Up to here, you did really well. Level-headed, consice, informative,
> and to the point. Excellent.
>
>
>>If I tell you much more on this list, certain people will get even
>>angrier. They don't want to hear these comparisons. :-)
>
>
> But here, you blew it. Personally I have *no* problem hearing
David, I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. I did clearly say above that
"certain people" don't want to hear it. I did not say "all of the
people" nor did I refer specifically to you.
Actually, I would imagine that people who are not ego-involved with
Velocity (most users) would be glad to hear about other things in this
space.
> about this type of comparisons, be it with FreeMarker, WebMacro,
> JSP (yech), XSLT or whatever. The problem seems to be you, and
> that you knowingly or unknowingly ignore this fact (yes, fact.)
I am glad to hear that you keep a mind open. That's refreshing. This was
simply not the feedback I had been getting so far. We've also had this
comical situation where a guy says openly that he's going to take the
opportunity to flame my work and this is somehow my fault.
<shrug>
Regards,
Jonathan
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by David Kinnvall <da...@alertir.com>.
Dear Jonathan,
You _almost_ made it. Please see below for why not.
From: "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es>
> lloyd wrote:
> >>Could you clarify your problem a bit.
> >
> > Sure:
[snip]
>
> I agree with you that a template engine should (at least by default)
> limit what is available to the template writer. I consider the WebMacro
> approach of exposing all of an object's public methods -- the approach
> that was later adopted by Velocity -- to be rather mistaken.
>
> In FreeMarker, you can finely control what is available by implementing
> the TemplateHashModel interface yourself and then you control exactly
> what is available to the template layer. (Or you can go the full
> introspection route alternatively, but there's the choice.)
>
> If you have further questions, you can write me in private or subscribe
> to the Freemarker-devel mailing list here:
>
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
Up to here, you did really well. Level-headed, consice, informative,
and to the point. Excellent.
> If I tell you much more on this list, certain people will get even
> angrier. They don't want to hear these comparisons. :-)
But here, you blew it. Personally I have *no* problem hearing
about this type of comparisons, be it with FreeMarker, WebMacro,
JSP (yech), XSLT or whatever. The problem seems to be you, and
that you knowingly or unknowingly ignore this fact (yes, fact.)
Regards,
David.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On 5/4/02 8:18 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
>
>>You're actually right that the fine control is not quite in place yet.
>>There are plans underway for FM 2.1 to make the control finer-grained
>>than this as opposed to minimal vs. kitchen-sink-introspection.
>>
>
>
> And I am *sure* this wouldn't be an appropriate place to say... How did you
> put it... Let me find it....
>
> On 5/4/02 6:24 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
>
>>Monkey see. Monkey do.
Geir, in terms of the customizable introspector idea, I can tell you
that I came up with that idea independently. But really, that's
irrelevant. Even if I were to copy a good idea from Velocity or some
other product, it would not be a case of "monkey see, monkey do". It
would simply be intelligent on my part.
When I made the admittedly cruel comment you quote above, I was
referring to the tendency of an imitator to mindlessly copy something --
both its good and its bad aspects. This, AFAICS, is why Velocity has
integers but not floating point.
Cheers,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/4/02 8:18 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
> You're actually right that the fine control is not quite in place yet.
> There are plans underway for FM 2.1 to make the control finer-grained
> than this as opposed to minimal vs. kitchen-sink-introspection.
>
And I am *sure* this wouldn't be an appropriate place to say... How did you
put it... Let me find it....
On 5/4/02 6:24 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
> Monkey see. Monkey do.
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> On 5/4/02 7:36 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
>
>
>>lloyd wrote:
>>
>>>>Could you clarify your problem a bit.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Sure:
>>>
>>>
>>>This is OK:
>>>
>>> $emp.getPayRate() <-- OK
>>>
>>>
>>>This is NOT OK:
>>>
>>> $emp.setIdentity("template designer")
>>> $emp.setPayRate($emp.getPayRate() * 100)
>>> $emp.save()
>>
>>
>>I agree with you that a template engine should (at least by default)
>>limit what is available to the template writer. I consider the WebMacro
>>approach of exposing all of an object's public methods -- the approach
>>that was later adopted by Velocity -- to be rather mistaken.
>
>
> With the the pluggable introspection in Velocity, you can control it in a
> custom way, tailored to your needs and requirements.
This must be very recent. I was in a fairly recent version of your code
(1.3rc1) to write the Vel->FM template converter and didn't see this.
Also, I don't believe it was mentioned in the docs.
Well, congratulations. I guess you finally realized after a couple of
years that the full-blown kitchen-sink introspection approach is not
always an appropriate solution.
>
>
>>In FreeMarker, you can finely control what is available by implementing
>>the TemplateHashModel interface yourself and then you control exactly
>>what is available to the template layer. (Or you can go the full
>>introspection route alternatively, but there's the choice.)
>
>
> Unless it was all I had to offer, I wouldn't myself call it 'fine' control,
> as you are forcing the user to have to write *more* code to your specific
> interface.
Well, that's a valid point, I suppose. Though you could easily
exaggerate how much extra work it is. In the case I mentioned of
TemplateHashModel, you create one method
get(String key);
Or you use the default SimpleHash wrapper and stick the key/value pairs
you want in there.
You're actually right that the fine control is not quite in place yet.
There are plans underway for FM 2.1 to make the control finer-grained
than this as opposed to minimal vs. kitchen-sink-introspection.
Cheers,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
>
The Velocity way lets you use your own objects, and just limit
> what can be discovered.
>
> Geir
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/4/02 7:36 PM, "Jonathan Revusky" <jr...@terra.es> wrote:
> lloyd wrote:
>>> Could you clarify your problem a bit.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sure:
>>
>>
>> This is OK:
>>
>> $emp.getPayRate() <-- OK
>>
>>
>> This is NOT OK:
>>
>> $emp.setIdentity("template designer")
>> $emp.setPayRate($emp.getPayRate() * 100)
>> $emp.save()
>
>
> I agree with you that a template engine should (at least by default)
> limit what is available to the template writer. I consider the WebMacro
> approach of exposing all of an object's public methods -- the approach
> that was later adopted by Velocity -- to be rather mistaken.
With the the pluggable introspection in Velocity, you can control it in a
custom way, tailored to your needs and requirements.
>
> In FreeMarker, you can finely control what is available by implementing
> the TemplateHashModel interface yourself and then you control exactly
> what is available to the template layer. (Or you can go the full
> introspection route alternatively, but there's the choice.)
Unless it was all I had to offer, I wouldn't myself call it 'fine' control,
as you are forcing the user to have to write *more* code to your specific
interface. The Velocity way lets you use your own objects, and just limit
what can be discovered.
Geir
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by Jonathan Revusky <jr...@terra.es>.
lloyd wrote:
>>Could you clarify your problem a bit.
>
>
>
> Sure:
>
>
> This is OK:
>
> $emp.getPayRate() <-- OK
>
>
> This is NOT OK:
>
> $emp.setIdentity("template designer")
> $emp.setPayRate($emp.getPayRate() * 100)
> $emp.save()
I agree with you that a template engine should (at least by default)
limit what is available to the template writer. I consider the WebMacro
approach of exposing all of an object's public methods -- the approach
that was later adopted by Velocity -- to be rather mistaken.
In FreeMarker, you can finely control what is available by implementing
the TemplateHashModel interface yourself and then you control exactly
what is available to the template layer. (Or you can go the full
introspection route alternatively, but there's the choice.)
If you have further questions, you can write me in private or subscribe
to the Freemarker-devel mailing list here:
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freemarker-devel
If I tell you much more on this list, certain people will get even
angrier. They don't want to hear these comparisons. :-)
Cheers,
Jonathan Revusky
--
Lead developer of FreeMarker http://freemarker.sourceforge.net/
Build robust web appications with the
Niggle Web Application Framework http://niggle.org/
Available for Java/Internet Consulting
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by lloyd <su...@twilight-systems.com>.
> Could you clarify your problem a bit.
Sure:
This is OK:
$emp.getPayRate() <-- OK
This is NOT OK:
$emp.setIdentity("template designer")
$emp.setPayRate($emp.getPayRate() * 100)
$emp.save()
:-)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by Terry Steichen <te...@net-frame.com>.
Lloyd,
Could you clarify your problem a bit.
When you say you want to restrict a template designer's access to methods,
you're presumably referring to context tool methods? And do you mean you
don't want the designer to be able to see them, or that you don't want the
template designer to make them available to persons using the template
he/she designs? And if you don't want the template designer to use them,
who *do* you want to use them?
Regards,
Terry
PS: The absence of floating point support keeps things simple. Yet it
definitely can be a pain, but that pain is easily eased by use of simple
context tools.
----- Original Message -----
From: "lloyd" <su...@twilight-systems.com>
To: "velocity-user" <ve...@jakarta.apache.org>
Sent: Saturday, May 04, 2002 4:40 PM
Subject: limiting access to a context object's methods
> often, a have an existing object that i'd like to give a template
> designer access to, but i'd like to restrict the methods that are
> available to him.
>
> what's the best way to do this?
>
>
> factor the object into readable and writeable classes?
>
> define an interface and implement it in the object?
>
> create a wrapper class?
>
>
> i'm not sure i like any of these approaches. in the first two they
> require changes to the design of every object. the second one requires
> a rather tedious and redundant-feeling exercise for each object.
>
> is a generic velocity facility available that allows the developer to
> choose which methods are available to the designer?
>
> or, in lieu of that, i'll take an extended discussion about why that
> idea is bad and why one of the other options (or another) is better :-)
>
> ps -
>
> <flamebait>
>
> my designer still doesn't understand what's so damn special about
> decimal points that velocity can't support them in VTL :-)
>
> </flamebait>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by jonah benton <jo...@jonah.com>.
On Sat, 2002-05-04 at 13:40, lloyd wrote:
> often, a have an existing object that i'd like to give a template
> designer access to, but i'd like to restrict the methods that are
> available to him.
>
> what's the best way to do this?
>
>
> factor the object into readable and writeable classes?
>
> define an interface and implement it in the object?
>
> create a wrapper class?
>
>
The wrapper approach might be automatable with xdoclet:
http://xdoclet.sourceforge.net/
I haven't used it, but from what I gather you could drive wrapper code
creation from annotations in your source. So you could generate a
wrapper class suitable for use in the Context that only made, from your
other example, getPayRate() available, based on source annotation.
> i'm not sure i like any of these approaches. in the first two they
> require changes to the design of every object. the second one requires
> a rather tedious and redundant-feeling exercise for each object.
>
> is a generic velocity facility available that allows the developer to
> choose which methods are available to the designer?
>
> or, in lieu of that, i'll take an extended discussion about why that
> idea is bad and why one of the other options (or another) is better :-)
>
> ps -
>
> <flamebait>
>
> my designer still doesn't understand what's so damn special about
> decimal points that velocity can't support them in VTL :-)
>
> </flamebait>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/4/02 5:12 PM, "lloyd" <su...@twilight-systems.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes. In the 1.4-dev, there now is the 'Uberspector', which brings together
>> the interospection into one place, allowing you to plug in your own.
>>
>> I am playing with it in the commons-sandbox 'jexl' project to limit access
>> to methods on Object. Will bring the code back here to contrib when it
>> works.
>
> so, would that be then integrated as a standard velocity feature?
>
The pluggable introspection already is in 1.4-dev. The specific rules that
one uses (in my case, no Object other than toString() ) is your choice in
deployment.
*If* people liked it enough, we could offer it in the core, but there are
people that do like to access whatever they want (classloaders, for example)
and we couldn't take that away from them.
>
>>> <flamebait>
>>>
>>> my designer still doesn't understand what's so damn special about
>>> decimal points that velocity can't support them in VTL :-)
>>>
>>> </flamebait>
>>
>> Sometimes I don't either. :)
>
> i don't suppose this is a window of opportunity to add decimal-number
> support? :-)
(shhhhh:)
Lets let the current : vs & vs + flamewar blow itself out...
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by lloyd <su...@twilight-systems.com>.
> Yes. In the 1.4-dev, there now is the 'Uberspector', which brings together
> the interospection into one place, allowing you to plug in your own.
>
> I am playing with it in the commons-sandbox 'jexl' project to limit access
> to methods on Object. Will bring the code back here to contrib when it
> works.
so, would that be then integrated as a standard velocity feature?
> > <flamebait>
> >
> > my designer still doesn't understand what's so damn special about
> > decimal points that velocity can't support them in VTL :-)
> >
> > </flamebait>
>
> Sometimes I don't either. :)
i don't suppose this is a window of opportunity to add decimal-number
support? :-)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: limiting access to a context object's methods
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@adeptra.com>.
On 5/4/02 4:40 PM, "lloyd" <su...@twilight-systems.com> wrote:
> often, a have an existing object that i'd like to give a template
> designer access to, but i'd like to restrict the methods that are
> available to him.
>
> what's the best way to do this?
>
>
> factor the object into readable and writeable classes?
>
> define an interface and implement it in the object?
>
> create a wrapper class?
>
All the above would work.
> i'm not sure i like any of these approaches. in the first two they
> require changes to the design of every object. the second one requires
> a rather tedious and redundant-feeling exercise for each object.
>
> is a generic velocity facility available that allows the developer to
> choose which methods are available to the designer?
Yes. In the 1.4-dev, there now is the 'Uberspector', which brings together
the interospection into one place, allowing you to plug in your own.
I am playing with it in the commons-sandbox 'jexl' project to limit access
to methods on Object. Will bring the code back here to contrib when it
works.
> or, in lieu of that, i'll take an extended discussion about why that
> idea is bad and why one of the other options (or another) is better :-)
>
> ps -
>
> <flamebait>
>
> my designer still doesn't understand what's so damn special about
> decimal points that velocity can't support them in VTL :-)
>
> </flamebait>
Sometimes I don't either. :)
--
Geir Magnusson Jr.
Research & Development, Adeptra Inc.
geirm@adeptra.com
+1-203-247-1713
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>