On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Gerald Richter wrote:
> > >
> > > Also consider code like <TR BGCOLOR=[+ $col +]> or even <TR [$ if $col
> > > $]BGCOLOR="#ffffff"[$endif$]>, how should this look with the new syntax?
> > >
> >
> > Something like:
> > <TR BGCOLOR=<%= $col %>
>
> Is there missing an closing '>' ?
Of course! It does look a bit too lisp'ish though. That could be
construed as an advantage for the current [+ .. +] scheme.
>
>
> > and
> > <TR <% if ($col) {%> BGCOLOR="#ffffff"<%}%>>
> >
> > I must have been using Apache::ASP too much ;-)
> > But seriously: I do like the idea of using Perl syntax to control
> > things. I haven't considered whether it would ruin EmbPerl or not...
> >
>
> For me it's harder to read, but this is a matter of taste. Of course using
> the Perl control structures has adavtages.
>
Not the least of which is not having to remember another set of
control structures. I usually take a break when I use a dangling if in
C++!
> In my plans for the next version, I like to improve also this area (you can
> already do it with [* *], but it does not work under all conditions)
>
---
Henrik Tougaard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FOA Trade Union for Public employees Denmark.
#include <disclaim.std>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
