It sounds like you need to think about it and let us know. I took the approach I did because of your concerns expressed previously about how to interpret arguments. I think we all agree that the syntax can be better, and I would like to see us iterate on the current syntax before issuing any formal release and taking on a backwards compatibility burden. If any of my changes help us further that thinking process then it was time well spent.
chris On Sep 21, 4:41 pm, Nathan Weizenbaum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not sure I want to add another alternate syntax, especially one with > different semantics. I'm worried about syntax bloat, especially when it > doesn't add any power. I am kind of fond of the more CSS-like syntax for > mixins, but I'm not sure it's worth either the syntax bloat if we don't > eval the parameters or the confusing syntax if we do. > > Chris Eppstein wrote: > > Interpolation is the difference between: > > > :width 200px > > > which is not interpolated and > > > :width= 200px > > > which is. > > > -chris > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
