I believe json's mapping agrees with what've been proposed.
Json array maps to java.util.List. Json Syntax ["one", "two", "three"]
Json object maps to java.util.Map. Json syntax {"one": 1, "two": 2,
"three": 3 }
Exactly what we'll use. :-)
Kin-man
On 12/02/11 19:25, Jon Stevens wrote:
> My only opinion on this is that you make things as compatible with
> json as possible.
>
> jon
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Kin-man Chung
> <kinman.chung_at_oracle.com <mailto:kinman.chung_at_oracle.com>> wrote:
>
> As I mentioned before, it has been suggested that EL use the
> syntax that is being proposed for JDK 8 for collection literals.
>
> The current syntax for JDK 8 is as the following:
>
> 1. Set: {1, 2, 3}
> 2. List: ["one", "two", "three"]
> 3. Map: {"one": 1, "two": 2, "three": 3 }
>
> There is no literals for arrays. Presumably it can be
> accomplished with, for instance, new int[] {1,23} that is already
> in Java.
>
> Therefore I think we should also omit array literals, not only
> because JDK 8 does not have it, but also because a Java array does
> not implement a java.lang.Collection or java.lang.Iterable, so it
> cannot partake the query operators. This is not a big lost,
> because one can always construct an array from a List easily:
>
> ["one", "two", "three"].toArray()
>
> Other scripting languages, such as javascript or PHP, also do not
> have arrays, and use a list in place of an array whenever an array
> is needed.
>
> I am not sure if a Set literal is useful in EL, but am inclined to
> keep it for completeness.
>
> I also realize that a Map is not a collection, so in the query
> operations, we'll need to iterate over its Collection view, i.e.
> Map.entrySet. For instance, if salary is a map of name to annual
> amount, the following is a collection of names whose salary is
> greater then 10000.
>
> salary.where(#{p -> p.value > 10000}).select(#{p -> p.key})
>
> If there is no other opinions, I'll update the wiki page to
> reflect such changes.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Kin-man
>
>