[ZPT] Mini proposal: repeat-define and repeat-condition

[Jamie Heilman]

Chris Withers wrote:
> Yeah, but it increases the size of ZPT's grammar, which is big enough 
> already IMHO...

I agree.  My thought though, is why not just let the user define the
operation order of TAL statements.  I for one would love to move
omit-tag before atributes as afaict computing attributes and then
throwing away the entire tag is a waste of time.[1]  I understand that
fully customizable op order may yeild an interpreter thats too slow
though, I haven't looked at the TAL engine to see what dynamically
changing the grammar would entail.  Thoughts?

-- 
Jamie Heilman                   http://audible.transient.net/~jamie/
"You came all this way, without saying squat, and now you're trying
 to tell me a '56 Chevy can beat a '47 Buick in a dead quarter mile?
 I liked you better when you weren't saying squat kid."	-Buddy

[1] unless you count being able to generate side-effects akin to a
    dtml-call in an attributes statement a "Feature" ... I don't, I
    consider it to be an indication of really poor style