After rereading the posts on this, my previous post seems redundant.
Jesse's Java nesting example is sufficient to explain why the nesting
feels unnatural. (Not to diminish Howard's amazing ability to re-invent!)
Kent's "then" parameter is a great idea, but the nesting seems excessive.
I still think Tapestry already had this one right, yet again. ;-)
BUT ... speaking of nesting, I was reminded of a thought I've had on
occasion when adding conditionals into a template. It would be great
if all components had a conditional attribute - no need to nest more.
eg.
<a t:id="deleteLink">...</a>
->
<a t:id="deleteLink" t:renderif="condition">...</a>
Obviously this is only useful in certain situations, but for complex
templates the less unnecessary nesting of tags the better.
Just thought I'd bring this up while the pot's on the stove.
Anyone else ever wish for this, or think it might be practical?
Cheers,
Nick.
Nick Westgate wrote:
> Jesse's example looks better when you need to add interceding content.
> The nesting of the else parameter impedes a common use case for else,
> and if there's no Else component, we end up 'negatively' violating DRY:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
