Now I got explanation, and everything seems to be logical. However, initially (maybe because of c, java, ruby and so on) I thought that comments(there position in the code) can't influence on the execution process, but in reality it can! And I didn't understand what was the problem with my code until by chance I didn't remove the commented line.
I thought it is only my problem, but none of my partners knows about it. Maybe it is worth doing in order to improve haml to pay new users' attention to this fact, or to give a warning, when the comment seems to be in wrong place(like between if-else), or just to delete comments during execution (I still didn't get the point to treat them as part of the code, if I am wrong, could you please give me an example of using comments) I agree that it is cool to have comment about "else" inside of this "else", but one has to make a user aware, that it shouldn't be before "else". I don't think that the problem in haml, but in user perception of things he is used to Regards, Evgeny On Mar 3, 10:54 am, Wincent Colaiuta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > El 3/3/2008, a las 10:05, neem escribió: > > > > > Thank you for the explanation! > > > In my opinion, to improve the haml comments should be possible at any > > place, anyway they are removed. > > When interpretator sees -#, it should remove the line. Probably, I am > > mistaking and can't see the problems, that could appear in this case. > > > Another problem. When I put the code like this: > > - if > > -# comment > > - else > > there is a translation into > > if > > end > > # comment > > else (but why I don't receive a notification about error?, can it > > happen that block of code begins with "else" without "if" before?) > > I know this may seem like a limitation (lack of flexibility as to > where you can put your comments) but it's actually a strength of Haml. > One of the reasons why Haml markup looks so clean is that it uses > indentation to communicate semantics, just like Python does. So the > benefit you get is auto-closing scopes and no need to worry about > explicitly writing "end" all the time, and the cost is that you have > to be disciplined about your use of whitespace. In other words, the > rule is "indentation matters"; I think introducing exceptions to the > indentation rules would reduce the simplicity and elegance of the > rule, because it would become "indentation matters, uh, except for > when..." > > In the example you originally posted you wrote: > > -if > blah > -# foo > -else > blah > -end > > But you've broken the indentation rule right there, so to fix them > you'd write: > > -if > blah > -# foo > -else > blah > -end > > Which obviously reduces the visually continuity of the "foo" comment > and the part of the code that it applies to, so where should the > comment go? > > -if > blah > -else > -# foo > blah > -end > > That's the spot for it, as it respects the indentation rule and its > location clearly shows the block of code that it applies to. > > Cheers, > Wincent --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
