Why should django.template be refactored? Filter and Variable parsing
is inconsistent. Many ad hoc parsers in defaulttags are fragile.
Whitespace handling is ungraceful.
The patch provided in #7806[1] splits __init__.py into separate
modules[2] and introduces a TokenStream class that allows
On Sep 16, 2:36 pm, Johannes Dollinger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why should django.template be refactored? Filter and Variable parsing
> is inconsistent. Many ad hoc parsers in defaulttags are fragile.
> Whitespace handling is ungraceful.
>
> The patch provided in #7806[1] splits __init__.py in
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 20:36 +0200, Johannes Dollinger wrote:
> Why should django.template be refactored? Filter and Variable parsing
> is inconsistent. Many ad hoc parsers in defaulttags are fragile.
> Whitespace handling is ungraceful.
>
> The patch provided in #7806[1] splits __init__.py i
On Sep 16, 7:36 pm, Johannes Dollinger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> @register.tag
> @uses_token_stream
> def mytag(parser, bits):
> expr = bits.parse_expression(required=True)
> return MyNode(expr)
>
> `uses_token_stream` replaces the Token argument to the parser
> function with a Toke
Am 17.09.2008 um 01:37 schrieb Malcolm Tredinnick:
> As was pointed out the first time you brought this up, keep in mind
> that
> there still need to be ways to manually control the lexing phase. Not
> every template tag has the same requirements there.
>
> Also, since the Variable class is pa
> Would @register.tag(token_stream=True) work instead, or am I missing
> something?
Yes, that would work.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
To post to this group, send emai
I take it that most are aware of:
http://lucumr.pocoo.org/cogitations/2008/09/16/why-jinja-is-not-django-and-why-django-should-have-a-look-at-it/
It seems like a very well thought out and thorough write up.
Ben
2008/9/17 Johannes Dollinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Would @register.tag(token_st
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 14:42 +0100, Ben Ford wrote:
> I take it that most are aware of:
>
> http://lucumr.pocoo.org/cogitations/2008/09/16/why-jinja-is-not-django-and-why-django-should-have-a-look-at-it/
>
> It seems like a very well thought out and thorough write up.
Um .. welll. :-(
Parts of
I don't know if anyone's noticed, but the templating language seems
(at least from a usage standpoint) to be a lot like a Lisp
interpreter.
I know that sounds completely weird and random, but it's true. It's
like a very small subset of Scheme or something (the small subset
thing is necessary becau
If I follow you are saying that it is lispy in that flow control
statements and functions are handled just the same way(meaning you can
define your own statements if you like)?
On Sep 17, 8:02 pm, zvoase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I don't know if anyone's noticed, but the templating language se
I guess so, but also from the overall *feel* of using it; I find
myself switching into Lisp mode when I use it. That probably makes no
sense, but it's just this feeling I had. I guess it feels as though
there's some big eval/apply machine behind it all. And the fact that
templates are compiled to
On Sep 18, 12:52 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 14:42 +0100, Ben Ford wrote:
> Parts of it are very well thought out and if it had been a post on "how
> Jinja works" it would have been excellent. Other parts are completely
> unconstrained by facts or ackn
On Sep 17, 11:52 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 14:42 +0100, Ben Ford wrote:
> > I take it that most are aware of:
>
> >http://lucumr.pocoo.org/cogitations/2008/09/16/why-jinja-is-not-djang...
>
> > It seems like a very well thought out and thorough wri
What really annoys me is all the talk about how important it is that
its designed for non-programmers but if i recall corectly jacob said
on djangocon that they never aimed for making django a general purpose
webframework, they just made something that fit their needs. With that
said, how many dja
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 4:15 AM, Vinay Sajip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are philosophical differences between Django and Jinja
> templating about how much power there should be in the templating
> engine. Django's philsophy is to keep the power to the minimum
> required - "templates are no
On Sep 19, 4:16 pm, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 4:15 AM, Vinay Sajip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There are philosophical differences between Django and Jinja
> > templating about how much power there should be in the templating
> > engine. Django's
16 matches
Mail list logo