You're absolutely right.  I suppose I'm just hoping for some sort of
compromise.  Perhaps we could use escapes?

-Michael

On May 26, 8:41 pm, Nathan Weizenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Well, there are several issues with this. First, it is sort of against
> the structural ideas of Haml. Also, it's ambiguous... that could just as
> easily be interpreted as <tr>%td "stuff" %td "stuff" %td "stuff"</tr>.
>
> - Nathan
>
> gberz3 wrote:
> > I know, I know, I'm likely defeating the entire purpose of HAML, yet,
> > I can't not say something.  I'm looking to put tags on the same line
> > for both space savings as well as intuitive reading.  For instance,
> > I'd like to be able to say the following:
>
> > %html
> >    %body
> >            %table
> >            %tr %td "stuff" %td "stuff" %td "stuff
>
> > . . .instead of:
>
> > %html
> >    %body
> >            %table
> >            %tr
> >            %td "stuff"
> >            %td "stuff"
> >            %td "stuff"
>
> > This would save space and, in some cases, be easier to decipher.  Of
> > course, I'm not the one behind the code.  Thoughts?


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to