I've converted the offending preformatted partials back to ERb, since this seems like a good place for it. Now my only issue is the indentation, because the layout file is still Haml. If the | mark I suggested was added, to reset indentation, it would make it easier to include ERb partials like this, and my problem would be duly solved.
On Oct 24, 1:21 pm, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]> wrote: > Potentially, yes, but that would dramatically increase the cost of string > concatenation, which is something we desperately want to avoid, since string > concatenation happens a lot during the rendering of a Haml template. > > > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:19 PM, Chris Eppstein <[email protected]> wrote: > > Can't haml have some concept of a pre-formatted bit that gets set and then > > is sticky for the rest of the handling of that template? If the bit is set, > > haml layouts wouldn't re-indent those strings. This decision could be made > > dynamically and helpers could be made to help manage the formatting bit. > > > chris > > > (Implementation suggestion: haml can return an extended string object for > > tracking the state of preformatting) > > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Nathan Weizenbaum <[email protected]>wrote: > > >> First of all, filters like :preserve aren't meant for handling > >> dynamically-generated text; they're meant for handling literal, in-template > >> text with maybe some dynamic stuff sprinkled in. If you're dynamically > >> generating text, it's better to use the #preserve helper (or ~, which is a > >> shortcut for same). > > >> As for the source code aesthetics, as I mentioned on IRC, there's really > >> no good way to tell when it's possible to not use newline entities. > >> Declaring it in the template won't work, because it's *not* safe in that > >> template - the template still needs to be included in the layout, which > >> will > >> re-indent it and cause the whitespace to go wrong. The only potential > >> solution is to have some way of declaring "this template is never going to > >> be included in another template", something that might be added in the > >> future. > > >> On Sat, Oct 24, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Twisol <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> Hello, > > >>> So far I really love Haml, but I have an issue with it where it comes > >>> to preformatted text.I have a fairly large amount of preformatted text > >>> (generated on the fly by a Rails helper) that I'm trying to include > >>> into my page. Using the :preserve filter, it /looks/ fine, but in the > >>> source it's all on one line, word-wrapped to about thirty, and > >>> completely indecipherable. > > >>> I discussed this briefly with Nex3 on IRC, but he had to run. While > >>> writing this message, though, I did have an idea: would it be possible > >>> to add another tag prefix, using either a _ (underscore) or a | > >>> (pipe), to tell Haml that the tag's indentation (or at least its > >>> content) should be reset? Nex3 had mentioned that Haml couldn't > >>> determine when it was safe to perserve the literal newlines because it > >>> automatically indents text, but if you used | to reset indentation, it > >>> seems like it would be safer for Haml to do. If that was possible, I > >>> think "%pre|<" would work perfectly for my purposes. > > >>> Otherwise, some advice would be very much appreciated! Thanks in > >>> advance, > >>> ~Jonathan Castello --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
