Oh, ha, I thought I already had. Sure, I'll do it as soon as I get home. Thanks for reminding me.
- Nathan On 6/5/07, Tom Bagby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Will you be applying prerender_static_tags.diff in the near future? > Wasn't sure if it was clear that it was yet another distinct patch. > Have more stuff I'd like to submit, need to see where you actually > take the working version though to merge and diff against. > > Thanks, > Tom > > On Jun 5, 3:05 am, Nathan Weizenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Tom Bagby wrote: > > >> Yeah, I got that. I've removed that from the TODO. > > > > > Sorry, I can ramble when I'm excited, Haml does that to me. > > > > Oh, no problem, I get the same way. Also it was a helpful reminder; I > > hadn't /actually/ removed it from the TODO until you reminded me about > > it ;).> 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 :) > > > > Wow, that's really great to hear. I'm kind of self-conscious about my > > code... Haml in particular I've felt has been getting pretty messy. It's > > good to hear that it's not totally entangled. I still want to clean it > > up for 2.0, though. > > > > - Nathan > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
