Thanks! Vincent and Asiri! On Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 1:43 AM, Asiri Rathnayake < asiri.rathnayake(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote So is 2.0M2 required for me to implement a clojure macro similar to your ruby macro? When will 2.0M2 be released? Vincent Massol wrote: can use the new language using the script macro: http://code.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Macros/ScriptMacro The above link suggests I should be using at least 2.0M1 to get the following option, which seems necessary for generating content-data other than HTML pages w/o extra wiki markup messing up the syntax: wikiyestrue/falsetrueindicate if the result of the script execution has to be parsed by the current wiki parser. If not it's put in a verbatim block.2.0 M1 Therefore, should I try this out with 2.0M1, or a current snapshot? I'm definitely +1 to make it part of the XWiki platform (same as for jruby) if you develop it. Similar to jruby I don't think we should package it in the default WAR though but as an optional download to install (will be even easier with the app manager). I'm willing to try. Please let me know what version of XE will give the best success at this integration. Once I get things working I will look more closely at creating a package analogous to Asiri's Ruby, except it will integrate Clojure. And yes I'd be willing to develop this package once I get things working. One of the things I'll need to do is generate content-type other than HTML as the result of a page containing a Clojure script. I'm particularly interested in outputting JSON (plaintext). I assume this will be feasible in 2.0M1 and later? I Looking forward to using a language designed explicitly for "list processing" to create lists of JSON data! Niels http://nielsmayer.com

(I forgot to send this out a while back, probably because I didn't want to distract myself with thinking about integrating Xwiki and Clojure any more at the time :-) ) Got an interesting reply back from the Clojure list regarding JSR-223 support: http://groups.google.com/group/clojure/msg/ad811b69d448e3db (see below). Regarding this message, and Xwiki's JSR-223 API usage, a question: Does Xwiki's JSR-223 usage rely on the "Invocable interface" or the "Compilable-interface" ? Looking into what this all means, http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/J2SE/Desktop/scripting/ states Invokable is optional: Meanwhile., the author, Phil Frank, claims that Compilable is not implemented for his JSR-223 bridge, and may not be necessary for Clojure: Does Xwiki need anything from this Compilable interface, or will it's lack of implementation be a problem? As to the "active instance" issues brought up -- will these apply when running multiple active instances out of a web container like tomcat? According to http://tomcat.apache.org/tomcat-6.0-doc/class-loader-howto.html there's a separate classloader per web application, which means, I guess, that the JSR-223 clojure implementation will share any static initialization from the Clojure implementation: So if all Clojure under Xwiki is shared via a common "WebAppX" classloader under the Servlet Spec, does this mean that all Clojure instances would share a :"symbol table" and their values/properties? This could either become a useful feature, or an egregious security hole in a multi-wikli environment. ---------------- From: Phil Frank To: Clojure &lt;clojure(a)googlegroups.com&gt; On Aug 1, 2:36=A0am, Niels Mayer &lt;nielsma...(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: I'm the author of the JSR 223 bridge for Clojure. At the moment, I have several uncommitted changes (mainly related to wrapping it up in a nice OSGi service component (to be used optionally). The Invocable- stuff is not implemented at the moment, but will be painless to implement. The Compilable-interface is a bit harder to do, and given Clojure's AOT compilation, I'm not sure if there's really a use case (because if you use require within a small script, Clojure will already out of the box transparently choose a compiled implementation, given a proper classpath setup). It's not quite the same, but comes pretty close. Aside from that, I have some unresolved design issues regarding isolation of engines; this works differently for Clojure than for other dynamic languages for the reasons explained below. Due to the static initialization of the Clojure runtime, it is much harder to create different independent Clojure-engine instances, since this would require loading each Clojure-runtime under a separate classloader, which I am not opposed to, but was unable to implement. At the moment, I'm using a weird kind of isolation in which each Clojure-engine runs in its own thread, using a shared runtime, and bindings are isolated by pushing and popping them. I'm going to abandon this rather stupid approach and use a simpler "one namespace per engine"-scheme. This change should (hopefully) be transparent for little scripts that don't have their own explicit namespaces. If your scripts use user-defined namespaces, I'll just assume you break this isolation intentionally (which is true to the meaning of namespaces, after all). If anybody would like to look into the classloader-based isolation, I'd happily to integrate this change (even if this means a severe startup-overhead for the creation of each engine-instance; it's simply the proper way to do it). For production (at least if you plan to have more than one active engine instance), I'd recommend to wait for either the namespace-based isolation or (should anybody get involved) the classloader-based approach. I'll reply to this thread again if one of these approaches is implemented.