Good point, I'll add a warning for that. On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 10:17 AM, P T Withington <[email protected]>wrote:
> In fact, it surprised me that the compiler would not complain if it saw > both a text attribute _and_ non-LZX content in a tag that supports text. > > On 2010-09-14, at 10:07, Henry Minsky wrote: > > > That sounds like a good heuristic > > > > On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 11:18 PM, P T Withington <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > >> At least in this particular case, it's interesting that the programmer > >> explicitly said `text=""` in the open tag. I think we could say that if > you > >> explicitly assign the text attribute, whether in the open tag as is done > >> here, or as an explicit attribute tag, then the compiler should _not_ > try to > >> interpret the body of the tag as the text value. That would seem to > give an > >> easy out for the case where you want to make a one-off text instance > with > >> methods -- you just specify the content as the initial value of the text > >> attribute instead. > >> > >> How does that sound? > > -- Henry Minsky Software Architect [email protected]
