EL implies a small performance overhead but I guess it's acceptable for the gain here.
On 9/21/07, Adam Winer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > -1 to trying to turn everything into ResourceBundle. Just use EL - > ELResolver in 1.2, PropertyResolver in 1.1. As of 1.2, that gives > you ResourceBundle and Map support. In 1.1, only Map > (and bean, of course), but then again in 1.1 how do you get > unwrapped ResourceBundle instances into EL anyway? > > @Gary: the Shale LoadBundle class seems quite unnecessary > in 1.2, right? > > -- Adam > > > On 9/21/07, Gary VanMatre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > >From: "Simon Lessard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > >If we accept only a map, it's quite exclusive, unless we add yet > another > > tag, but I would be -1 on >that. However, as Adam suggested, we could > call > > it "translation-source" and support both Map and >ResourceBundle > instances. > > We have to a very thin adapter Map --> ResourceBundle if a Map >instance > is > > passed and the remaining code will continue to work as it's now, with a > > ResourceBundle. > > > > > FWIW, Shale has a utility class that sounds very similar to what you > have > > described [1]. > > > > > > [1] > > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/shale/framework/trunk/shale-core/src/main/java/org/apache/shale/util/LoadBundle.java?view=markup > > > > > > > > > > > >~ Simon > > > > Gary > > >
