Well, we *COULD* do the erb syntax.
#tag
fix the <%= thing.name %> boyyyeeee!
But, I don't know about that.
You make some good points Jeff. Let me mull over them.
-hampton.
On 2/8/07, Nathan Weizenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Speed isn't the only problem (although I think it's a pretty serious
> one... Haml is already considerably slower than ERb). It's more or less
> impossible to parse nested brackets using only Regular Expressions, so
> something like "blah blah blah #{func {:arg => val}}," would break.
> Also, for the same reason, Haml has a longstanding (although apparently
> low-impact) bug where something like "%a{:href => person_url} Hi, }
> there!" will break... your syntax would break there, as well. The only
> way around this would be to build our own, pure-Ruby byte-by-byte
> parser, which would further increase the time taken. So it's really not
> feasible.
>
> - Nathan
>
> Jeffrey Hardy wrote:
> >> But, I'd personally take a *few* ugly
> >> inline instances in trade for clear and usable structure definitions.
> >>
> >
> > I don't see this as a either/or problem. Ugliness must be rooted out.
> > The inline capabilities of Haml are sadly lacking, and it's forced me
> > to write some pretty ugly constructs. Not unlike Nathan's example:
> >
> > %p
> > I went to the
> > - succeed ',' do
> > = shops
> > so crossed the road
> >
> > I mean, come on. That's ugly. It's not Nathan's fault; there's just
> > no elegant way to do this in Haml. I've been forced to perform
> > similar view vandalism in much the same vein. And it hurts me. Haml
> > is about beauty. (Haml is also about structure. I contend that ugly
> > hanging constructs that are begging to be compacted make it difficult
> > to read and work with the structure).
> >
> > Why not interpret #{} embedding tags anywhere in non-evaling lines,
> > much in the same way that ERb allows <%= %>?
> >
> > I understand that scanning each line of the template looking for
> > embedded code will result in a performance hit, but I say 'meh'. I'd
> > rather have a speed decrease I'd never notice than ugly templates I
> > have to look at every day. (Besides. I've never found Haml to be
> > slow. Ever. Even in its pre-release days, before compilation support
> > was added. If your app is slow, Haml's render time is hardly the
> > bottleneck).
> >
> > So, anyways, am I the only one who thinks the following looks much
> > better?
> >
> > %p I went to the #{shops}, so crossed the road.
> >
> > %blockquote
> > I think that #{features[:inline_embedding]} would be a fabulous
> > idea that would surely bring about world peace. Please read my
> > crappy #{link_to 'blog', 'http://example.com'}, friend.
> >
> >
> >
> > /Jeff
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jeffrey Hardy (packagethief)
> > http://unspace.ca
> > http://quotedprintable.com
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Haml" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
