[stringtemplate-interest] getting rid of StringTemplateGroupLoader

[Zenaan Harkness]

On Mon, Nov 09, 2009 at 12:09:25PM -0800, Terence Parr wrote:
> On Nov 8, 2009, at 9:37 PM, Zenaan Harkness wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 05:20:38PM -0800, Terence Parr wrote:

> > This to me looks clean.
> >
> > Of course, no reason to not have "programmatical assembly of templates
> > and groups" api, as we have now. But I imagine, for any system of
> > significant size, the process I suggest above will be a godsend.
> > I've been craving for such simplicity for a while, and was
> > contemplating for some time (for when I had time) to create a separate
> > module which would do a little custom parsing and assembling, to
> > effectively get this auto-import/multi-inheritance type thing off the
> > ground for my own system. But a generic solution is always preferable.
> >
> > Q:
> > Does the above suggestion look clean, workable, and implementable?
> 
> how is it different than group loaders?

I guess it's not.

...
> > It's really nice to be able to work within ST 'text' files,
> > without having to re-compile some host (java, c# etc) code
> > to get my latest changes.
> 
> yep :)

Which is why I'm advocating for not getting rid of the loader concept.

Should not have to go into host lang code, change, recompile,
tofactor/ restructure my template groups. That's my thought.

I come from the almost never having manually assembled (in Java code)
an ST template/group side of the fence. Group files, inheritance, and
a craving for multiple import/ MI to add to the picture.

If ST4 can have both modes of operation, I'll be stoked.

best
zen

-- 
Free Australia: www.UPMART.org
Please respect the confidentiality of this email as sensibly warranted.