Hi--
On Apr 11, 2008, at 6:09 PM, ab5tract wrote: > Thanks, in this case > > = RedCloth.new @entry.content > > (for future search-grokkers: you have redcloth anyway, if you're > trying to :textile) > > thanks for the quick response. > > On Apr 12, 12:34 am, Nathan Weizenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> This isn't really what filters are for. Filters are meant for >> embedding >> non-Haml text within a Haml document. If you're just want to run a >> variable through textile, you should call Textile from Ruby code >> yourself. >> >> ab5tract wrote: >>> Is it currently possible to give :textile an instance variable to >>> parse and print the contents of? >> >>> I'd think it would look something like this, >> >>> :textile >>> = puts @entry.content >> >>> but perhaps it would have to look like :textile= @entry.content, so >>> that we wouldn't have to worry about looking for '=' and '-' in >>> filter >>> nestings. Any particular reason why Rails' textilize helper won't work for this? It just seems plainer to see: = textilize(@entry.content) than = RedCloth.new @entry.content --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
