@Chris: I'm a developer.
I do understand the motivation behind 'unifying' the syntax so that it
matches SCSS, is easier for designers to 'instantly' use sass, and
ultimately increase adoption.
However, I don't see a problem (granted, I'm not the one implementing
sass parsing) with keeping multiple acceptable syntaxes around.
For example, haml allows both () and {} for tag attribute
declarations, with different syntax for the key-value pairs. Or how
'@mixin name' and '+name' are both valid.
I also recognize this might seem rather trivial, and plenty of devs
might prefer the 'unified' $myvar: myval syntax.
If documentation clarity for sass/scss is of utmost importance, then
sure, publishing the de-facto syntax ($myvar: myval) makes sense. But
consider this a vote to just keep that alternative ($myvar = myval) as
part of the implementation. And also consider this a vote to keep the
+mixin_name syntax as well... even if it's not a first-class citizen
in the documentation.
Again, thanks for all things Haml and Sass.
--
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.
