> {.section group}
> {.section @|plural?}
> There are {num} people in group {name}.
> {.or}
> There is one person in group {name}.
> {.end}
> {.end}
I don't see the rule that this is implying. If plural? returns
"null", then how does the {.or} section have access to {name}? I
don't see how wrapping it in another section does it. Any rule I can
infer here will have a bunch of special cases and require keeping
track of more state.
>> {.section group|plural?}
>> {@|fancy-formatter-for-plural-groups}
>> {.or}
>> There is one person in group {name}. {# No fancy formatter}
>> {.end}
>
> {.section group|plural?}
> {@|fancy-formatter-for-plural-groups}
> {.or}
> There is one person in group {group.name}. {# No fancy formatter}
> {.end}
Also don't get this -- is the {group.name} vs. {name} a purposeful
disambiguation? I don't see why this is done differently than the
first case.
>
>> Also, predicates and formatters do different things, so we shouldn't
>> make them the same concept. Formatters are concerned with
>> substitution of values, and apply only to substitutions. Predicates
>> are concerned with *whether* to show a section.
>
> This is like saying that calls to an int(*)(void)
> and calls to a char(*)(void) do different things, so
> we can't refer to them both as function calls.
> The | syntax does the same thing in both cases: it takes
> the data, pipes it through the function, and uses the
> resulting value.
It's similar but not the same. In one case we substitute the
resulting value into the output. In the other we test the resulting
value for its "truth" and decide *whether* to expand a section into
the output. These are different things.
sections and substitutions are different. And formatters and
predicates are different. Although I agree that there is way to make
formatters apply to both sections AND substitutions -- there is also a
straightforward way for *predicates* to apply to section and
substitutions (coming next mail).
I want to avoid a 2x2 matrix of special cases, and instead have the
concepts be orthogonal. The special case I see here is: "If a
formatter is used in a substitution, its value is used. If it's used
in a section, then the value is tested for truth and that determines
if it's shown."
This morning I came up with a nice consistent model, which I'll write next.
Andy
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JSON
Template" 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/json-template?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
