[stringtemplate-interest] Separation of View and Biz Logic
jjsnyders at rcn.com
Wed May 16 05:33:12 PDT 2007
What you describe is not unreasonable but with newer builds of ST there
is a better option. The format option. It is not yet documented except
in this thread
This reminds me that I should document it soon.
Bill Venners wrote:
> Hi All,
> We are migrating some velocity templates to ST, and in the velocity
> templates we had been calling some static utility methods to do
> things like uppercase the first char, lowercase the first cahr
> transform a camel case word (like employeeStartDate) into a constant
> form (like EMPLOYEE_START_DATE)--things like that. Rather than make
> separate variable for each form, we were thinking of making a utility
> class whose instances take a String. Then there are get methods for
> each of the permutations, like getWithFirstUpper(), getWithFirstLower
> (), getInCamelCase(), getInConstantForm(), etc. So it could be
> accessed inside an ST template with employeeStartDate.withFirstUpper
> or employeeStartDate.inConstantForm. The toString method on this
> object would just return the String passed to the constructor. We
> would encapsulate relevant String variables inside instances of this
> class, then pass those to the template instead of the raw Strings.
> This seems perfectly reasonable way to do this, but I wanted to check
> whether it violated anyone's sense of strict separation between view
> and biz logic.
> Bill Venners
> Artima, Inc.
> stringtemplate-interest mailing list
> stringtemplate-interest at antlr.org
More information about the stringtemplate-interest