I agree that the percent sign is somewhat crufty. As I said before, were I to design Haml from scratch, I might well decide to get rid of it and use a special character for denoting text instead. However, that ship has sailed.
Of course, it would be possible to add an option or an alternate syntax in which the percent sign is gone. However that takes effort, not so much in terms of implementation but in terms of supporting an additional option and migrating people over and educating people and so forth. It requires of the users effort to choose between two syntaxes, to learn the differences and so forth. I don't think the percent sign is crufty *enough* to warrant that. On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 9:41 PM, Steve Howell <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Dec 7, 9:17 pm, Steve Howell <[email protected]> wrote: > sers from > > The percent sign is crufty. > > And it case it goes without saying my few critiques of HAML are only > given in light of me wanting it desperately to succeed, since it > solves such an important problem. > > -- > > 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] <haml%[email protected]>. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en. > > > -- 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.
