Re: Fulcrum components bsf and groovy obsoleted by script?

[Scott Eade <se...@backstagetech.com.au>]

Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> thanks for the gentle reminder ...
>
> +) I have an updated version based on the final JSR-223 release (but not
> committed) that works for Groovy and Rhino
> +) this implementation is already using the libraries from
> https://scripting.dev.java.net/
> +) the main problem I had is supporting JDK 1.5 which I solved at
> ApacheCon - the non-released bsf-api-3.0 is an ASF implementation for
> JSR-223
> +) so fulcrum-script is a JDK1.5+ component
>
> So the only thing which stopped me from committing is that the various
> ScriptEngine (Groovy, Rhino) implementation are not on any M2 repo - I
> currently keep them in a lib directory and tell M2 to pick them up from
> there. BTW,  I'm pretty sure that https://scripting.dev.java.net/ was
> not BSD licenced a while ago.
>
> Anyway - how to handle the ScriptEngine libraries
>
> +) M2 repo upload request but there are no official releases for the
> them ... :-(
> +) put them in our SVN repo in a "lib" directory with PMC blessing
>   
Groovy: http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/codehaus/groovy/groovy-all/1.6.3/

Rhino: A search[1] shows someone is at least receptive to deploying to a 
maven repository, but in the interest of allowing us to move forward I 
am +1 on either proceeding with a pointer in the release notes to the 
requirement to manually download the file, or even to drop a copy into SVN.
> And the unreleased BSF libraries ...
>   
Can re run with 3.0-b3 from 
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/bsf/bsf-utils/

Scott
[1] 
http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.dev.tech.js-engine.rhino/search?group=mozilla.dev.tech.js-engine.rhino&q=maven&qt_g=Search+this+group

> Cheers,
>
> Siegfried Goeschl
>
> PS: I have already two kids sitting on my lap - need a break
>
>
>
> PS: Many thanks to Felix Meschberger regarding BSF
>
> Scott Eade wrote:
>   
>> It appears that JSR-223 is bit of a mixed bag.
>>
>> As Siegfried has said below there were changes to the spec between its
>> 1.0 release and its inclusion in JDK 6:
>>
>>    * Namespace was renamed to Bindings
>>    * SimpleNamespace became SimpleBindings
>>    * Invocable.invoke() methods became Invocable.invokeFunction(String
>>      Object...) and Invocable.invokeMethod(Object, String Object...)
>>      [note the use of varargs]
>>    * there may be one or two other small changes.
>>
>> You can download a bunch of ScriptEngine implementations from
>> https://scripting.dev.java.net/ - I presume these all work with JDK 6,
>> certainly the JavaScript one does.  Note that JDK 6 on Windows
>> includes Rhino and the com.sun.script implementation of ScriptEngine,
>> but since scripting engines are optional you cannot actually rely on
>> this being present (e.g. JDK 6 on OS X does not come with Rhino).  To
>> use Rhino on OS X with JDK 6 you need the java.net ScriptEngine
>> implementation (which comes in a package named com.sun.phobos.script
>> and appears to work nicely with a standard Rhino download).  The
>> java.net implementation is not available in a maven repository (though
>> it is BSD licensed and is not a huge amount of code).
>>
>> AFAICT there is no stand alone version of javax.script that has been
>> updated to reflect the above changes so as to support JDK versions
>> prior to 6.  I did come across an Apache ScriptEngine implementation
>> for Rhino at
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/sling/trunk/bundles/scripting/javascript/
>> - sling seems to indicate that JDK 5 is okay, so I am not sure what
>> they are doing.
>>
>> What do people think of saying that fulcrum-script is a JDK 6+
>> component?  fulcrum-bsf/fulcrum-groovy could be retained in some form
>> to support JDK < 6 (note that there is chatter about a new release of
>> BSF).
>>
>> Of course if Siegfried can convince the JSR-223 spec lead to release a
>> stand alone update to the javax.script API then fulcrum-script should
>> be able to use it to support JDK < 6, but until then...  (can JDK 1.4
>> code pass vararg arguments such as Object... as Object[]?)
>>
>> I have patches here to update fulcrum-script to work with JDK 6, but I
>> won't commit them without comment from Siegfried.
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
>>     
>>> Hi Thomas,
>>>
>>> some historical background
>>>
>>> +) I needed a scripting integration for one of my products
>>> +) I had a look at BSF and found it largely deserted
>>> +) I wrote fulcrum-groovy but groovy was never stable enough for
>>> production usage
>>> +) I discovered the brand new JSR-223 and it gives me a script
>>> compile functionality to improve performance ... yippie
>>> +) Sun still worked on the JSR-223 spec (being part of JDK 1.6) and
>>> provided samples and libraries to be downloaded
>>> +) I got fulcrum-script it running in this ver early state
>>> (pre-final) using JavaScript and Groovy
>>> +) unfortunately Sun made a last minute change to the final Spec
>>> +) I got in touch with the JSR-223 spec lead and he told me that Sun
>>> might publish a final javax.script library to be used with JDK 1.4
>>>
>>> Soo far so good
>>>
>>> +) I downloaded the final spec and they have an updated javax.script
>>> +) I have a look to see if it is working somehow under with fulcrum
>>> and JDK 1.4
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Siegfried Goeschl
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thomas Vandahl wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>
>>>> My understanding of the intention of fucrum-script is that it
>>>> supports all JSR-223 implementations of scripting engines. Would
>>>> that be a true replacement for the other scripting components? I
>>>> would like to get rid of them then. Your comments are welcomed.
>>>> Especially Siegfrieds as we already talked about the subject but I
>>>> cannot remember the outcome...
>>>>
>>>> Bye, Thomas.
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>>
>>>       
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>
>   

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org