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

[Jeffrey P Shell]

If you can re-arrange the rules, then what good are the rules?  I stand 
by the fact that whenever I've been mildly surprised by an 
order-of-operations issue, I could look up the rule (relatively) easily 
in Zope-help or online.  The rules are simple and concise and are what 
makes working with TAL such a joy compared to the alternative.

Regarding rewriting rules on a template by template basis - how would 
this affect METAL macros written by a third party but used by you, or 
little TAL components that are included into the page?  It's another 
gain that doesn't (in my opinion) outweigh its potential consequences.

On Tuesday, January 21, 2003, at 10:32  AM, Clemens Robbenhaar wrote:

>
> Troy Farrell writes:
>> MMmmmm.  My first thought is that this would break any code I ship 
>> that
>> depends on a certain order of operations :(
>>
>> Jamie Heilman wrote:
>>> 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?
>>>
>
>  ... unless the order of operations is defined in the page template or
> so, and can be shipped together with the page template.
>
>  (This does not imply I have any idea what "defined in the page 
> template
> or so" may mean ;-)
>
> Clemens
>
> _______________________________________________
> ZPT mailing list
> ZPT@zope.org
> http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zpt