On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 10:17:00AM -0500, Shawn M Moore wrote:
> I'll detail my counterproposal.. proposals! in a followup mail.
Okay so I think it's already been decided that we don't need to name
wrappers. Good.
I think we can get away with not allowing subpaths for wrappers.
Presumably you would use such a thing when you want to wrap only a
subset of the templates in the package. But then why not just make a new
package and use mix/alias?
So, if we have nameless wrappers that always apply to '/' (or rather, '.'),
we can have shiny syntax:
wrapper {
my ($self, @args) = @_;
html {
body {
inner(@args); # or maybe just "inner;" a la Moose
}
}
};
Another option is to specify wrappers in calls to "mix" and "alias". I
don't know if there's a good use case for this.
alias 'CRUD' under '/crud', wrapper {
h1 { "Yay CRUD!" };
inner;
p { "Back to your regularly scheduled slog." };
};
If we do add this, it should be a separate feature. I don't like that
it's kind of action-at-a-distancey.
Shawn
_______________________________________________
jifty-devel mailing list
jifty-devel@lists.jifty.org
http://lists.jifty.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/jifty-devel
