Thanks, that fixed it right up! On May 8, 3:37 pm, "Nathan Weizenbaum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yikes! That's debugging code, and shouldn't have been committed. I've just > removed it from trunk. > > - Nathan > > On 5/8/07, Robin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I'm using Haml from svn and I noticed some new behavior that breaks my > > site, and I was wondering whether the fault is mine or Haml's: > > > Basically, I have a template (_logged_in.haml) that displays the > > currently logged in user's name if you're logged in. If you're not, > > it returns a blank template. With the current svn, this causes it to > > throw an exception due to the following code: > > > if @buffer.buffer.empty? > > if @options[:filename] > > raise @template.inspect > > end > > end > > > inside engine.rb > > > So my question is, are empty templates OK? My gut feeling is they > > should be, but your opinions may differ. If they are, we should add > > some tests for them. I was hesitant to produce a patch for this > > because I don't know if the above code also catches another error I'm > > not aware of that could occur.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
