> Yeah, I got that. I've removed that from the TODO. Sorry, I can ramble when I'm excited, Haml does that to me.
> I don't think it's much of a problem to have custom tabulation be a > slow-performance special case. It should only be used for very limited > spans of text. The first idea that pops into my head for making it work > is to redefine "<<" so that it adds extra tabs, then un-redefine it > afterwards. I'm not entirely clear on the internals of how Ruby does > method stuff, but I believe that shouldn't have a performance impact on > stuff outside of the increased tabulation area I declare you a genius. That's exactly what I'll do and yes, it should make it free when undef'ed. Last comment about what I said about refactoring/current code state, I almost certainly would not have maintained interest/enthusiasm this long except that Haml implementation is very nice and pleasant to work with. Well organized in such a way that begged to be hacked on :) Thanks, Tom --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
