> Right, but just like formatters, you can interpret the predicate
> string however you want -- in this case it's "counter plural". So you
> can interpreter one part as a string identifying a node. If you have
> the context, you can look up the argument. I'll try to code this up.
So what is the name of the predicate?
- plural
- counter plural
We don't currently force formatters to lookup what they are formatting
-- I'd like predicates to work the same way. In a way, when I am the
same person writing the code and the templates, it is easy to go
either way. But when you have other people writing the templates, and
yet other people adding formatters/predicates on rare occasions, you
want the formatters/predicates to be flexible enough that the two
groups don't have to talk often. ;)
> On another note, I think I'm going to accept ".if", but something that
> ends with ? is also an implicit if. That is:
Thanks. It's easier to teach that way: Hey guys, {.section foo} scopes
to the foo node and {.if bar} just tests for it, and {.if bar plural},
you know, checks if bar is plural.
-s
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "JSON
Template" 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/json-template?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
