26 Mar
2015
26 Mar
'15
8:42 a.m.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:14 PM, Thomas Mortagne <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com>
wrote:
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
Ok for the change.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 3:09 PM, vincent(a)massol.net <vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
Well, I do not really see the benefit, but more the potential
inconveniences it could cause to existing code.
There is maybe a midway. IIRC, the script macros are not accepting to be
inlined. For your sample, it looks to me that it would be the intended
purpose.
So, what we could do is allow script macro to be inlined, and in that case,
we do not provide any writer, and we simply parse the eval return.
Another way could also to have an eval macro, and keep the script one as it
is now.
I am -0 for this change as is, and +1 for any of the above proposal.
Hi devs,
I’ve implemented http://jira.xwiki.org/browse/XWIKI-11961
However it’s causing several tests to fail, proving that it’s changing
the script
behaviors. For example if you have:
{{groovy}}
var = "toto"
{{/groovy}}
{{velocity}}
$var
{{/velocity}}
Then you’ll see “toto” printed twice. Once for the groovy macro.
The right way to not output content is to use output=false as in:
{{groovy output="false"}}
var = "toto"
{{/groovy}}
{{velocity}}
$var
{{/velocity}}
So we need to decide if we’re ok to go with this even though it changes
the
behavior.
I don’t completely master the full gamut of consequences this will have
but I have
the feeling that from a logical point of view, it’s the best
thing to have.
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
--
Thomas Mortagne
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs