You'll need to get access to the final template text and unpreserve that. That'll take some monkeypatching of Rails to get right.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Twisol <[email protected]> wrote: > > Pardon my naiveté, but could you give me an example of how to go about > doing that? I've tried using my homemade unpreserve helper at many > points along the chain of partials, with no real success. > > On Oct 25, 12:28 pm, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote: > > I guess you'd need unpreserve along with some way of not indenting the > > partial. Or you could simply run #unpreserve on the finished template > once > > it's rendered. In any case, I don't want to add new syntax to Haml for > what > > amounts to a relatively minor, purely aesthetic issue. > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 5:13 PM, Twisol <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > After attempting to write an 'unpreserve' helper (which merely gsub's > > > HTML-entity newlines into literal newlines), I'm still suffering the > > > exact same indentation issues. It seems like, currently, there's just > > > no way to stop indentation -and- preserve literal newlines. :perserve > > > does the former, and ~ the latter, but I can't for the life of me > > > produce both effects. > > > > > On Oct 24, 2:15 pm, Twisol <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > That's exactly what I'd like to do: make the entire partial > > > > unindented. I envision a | mark resetting the indentation level for > > > > the tag it's used on; if there are nested tags, they would still be > > > > indented, but relative to the reset level. When used with my ERb > > > > partials, I'm basically saying that I'm taking indentation into my > own > > > > hands, which is precisely what I require for my preformatted text. > > > > > > I'll look into writing an unpreserve helper, but I still like the > > > > (perceived) elegance of my | suggestion. Thanks for your time. > > > > > > On Oct 24, 1:59 pm, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Converting the partials to ERB isn't going to help, since (as you > > > noted) the > > > > > issue comes from the Haml layout re-indenting the code. I don't see > how > > > a > > > > > syntactic marker could help this, unless you want the entire > partial to > > > be > > > > > un-indented. A better solution would be to make an unpreserve > helper > > > that > > > > > you wrap your partial calls in in the layout that converts newline > > > entities > > > > > into actual newlines. > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:24 PM, Twisol <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > > I've converted the offending preformatted partials back to ERb, > since > > > > > > this seems like a good place for it. Now my only issue is the > > > > > > indentation, because the layout file is still Haml. If the | mark > I > > > > > > suggested was added, to reset indentation, it would make it > easier to > > > > > > include ERb partials like this, and my problem would be duly > solved. > > > > > > > > On Oct 24, 1:21 pm, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Potentially, yes, but that would dramatically increase the cost > of > > > string > > > > > > > concatenation, which is something we desperately want to avoid, > > > since > > > > > > string > > > > > > > concatenation happens a lot during the rendering of a Haml > > > template. > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Chris Eppstein < > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > Can't haml have some concept of a pre-formatted bit that gets > set > > > and > > > > > > then > > > > > > > > is sticky for the rest of the handling of that template? If > the > > > bit is > > > > > > set, > > > > > > > > haml layouts wouldn't re-indent those strings. This decision > > > could be > > > > > > made > > > > > > > > dynamically and helpers could be made to help manage the > > > formatting > > > > > > bit. > > > > > > > > > > chris > > > > > > > > > > (Implementation suggestion: haml can return an extended > string > > > object > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > tracking the state of preformatting) > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Nathan Weizenbaum < > > > [email protected] > > > > > > >wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> First of all, filters like :preserve aren't meant for > handling > > > > > > > >> dynamically-generated text; they're meant for handling > literal, > > > > > > in-template > > > > > > > >> text with maybe some dynamic stuff sprinkled in. If you're > > > dynamically > > > > > > > >> generating text, it's better to use the #preserve helper (or > ~, > > > which > > > > > > is a > > > > > > > >> shortcut for same). > > > > > > > > > >> As for the source code aesthetics, as I mentioned on IRC, > > > there's > > > > > > really > > > > > > > >> no good way to tell when it's possible to not use newline > > > entities. > > > > > > > >> Declaring it in the template won't work, because it's *not* > safe > > > in > > > > > > that > > > > > > > >> template - the template still needs to be included in the > > > layout, > > > > > > which will > > > > > > > >> re-indent it and cause the whitespace to go wrong. The only > > > potential > > > > > > > >> solution is to have some way of declaring "this template is > > > never > > > > > > going to > > > > > > > >> be included in another template", something that might be > added > > > in the > > > > > > > >> future. > > > > > > > > > >> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Twisol < > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >>> Hello, > > > > > > > > > >>> So far I really love Haml, but I have an issue with it > where it > > > comes > > > > > > > >>> to preformatted text.I have a fairly large amount of > > > preformatted > > > > > > text > > > > > > > >>> (generated on the fly by a Rails helper) that I'm trying to > > > include > > > > > > > >>> into my page. Using the :preserve filter, it /looks/ fine, > but > > > in the > > > > > > > >>> source it's all on one line, word-wrapped to about thirty, > and > > > > > > > >>> completely indecipherable. > > > > > > > > > >>> I discussed this briefly with Nex3 on IRC, but he had to > run. > > > While > > > > > > > >>> writing this message, though, I did have an idea: would it > be > > > > > > possible > > > > > > > >>> to add another tag prefix, using either a _ (underscore) or > a | > > > > > > > >>> (pipe), to tell Haml that the tag's indentation (or at > least > > > its > > > > > > > >>> content) should be reset? Nex3 had mentioned that Haml > couldn't > > > > > > > >>> determine when it was safe to perserve the literal newlines > > > because > > > > > > it > > > > > > > >>> automatically indents text, but if you used | to reset > > > indentation, > > > > > > it > > > > > > > >>> seems like it would be safer for Haml to do. If that was > > > possible, I > > > > > > > >>> think "%pre|<" would work perfectly for my purposes. > > > > > > > > > >>> Otherwise, some advice would be very much appreciated! > Thanks > > > in > > > > > > > >>> advance, > > > > > > > >>> ~Jonathan Castello > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
