Can I just make an objection to calling it "insert" - IMO, that's a conflict with the language semantic of "embed" - I agree with-param is not ideal, but im not sure that "insert" is ideal either. I also agree with marius, what would you suggest to resolve this issue?
I tried to post yesterday but it looks like my mail didn't make it into the group. Cheers, Tim On 20/08/2009 14:15, "marius d." <[email protected]> wrote: > > I will add <lift:insert> support .. personally I don't feel very > comfortable allowing builtin snippets to have different names. One > case I'm thinking of that people may change them, post issues on the > list and we'd have o idea what the user really uses which may lead to > longer discussions and support. I've learned my lesson with over- > customization of things; it can bring real pains sometimes. > > Just my 2 cents ... > > Br's, > Marius > > On Aug 20, 4:09 pm, inca <[email protected]> wrote: >> Yes, David, that's wonderful idea, too. Should eliminate many >> headaches. >> >> On 20 авг, 01:59, David Pollak <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 2:46 AM, marius d. <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>> This is a decision that needs consensus ... and David's agreement. >> >>> I'm cool with it. >> >>> It might also be worth thinking about creating some "alias" library so folks >>> could change the default names of Lift's snippets. Or maybe that's just a >>> bad idea. >> >>>> Personally I agree with it but others may not. >> >>>> Br's, >>>> Marius >> >>>> On Aug 19, 12:41 pm, inca <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> Why not just introduce the new tag, leaving the former alone (possibly >>>>> deprecated in next major releases)? >> >>>>> On 19 авг, 12:07, "marius d." <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>> Yes we tried to deprecate it but later on we un-derprecate it :) >> >>>>>> So you can use <lift:with-param> safely. Purely for naming perspective >>>>>> <lift:insert> seems to me more intuitive than <lift:with-param> ... >>>>>> I'm not sure if this is a strong enough motivation to change the name >>>>>> hence inducing a breaking change. >> >>>>>> Br's, >>>>>> Marius >> >>>>>> On Aug 19, 10:55 am, inca <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>>>>>> As suggested inhttp:// >>>> groups.google.com/group/liftweb/browse_thread/thread/d664b712d... >>>>>>> by Mr. Marius D., I should use lift:with-param in order to insert >>>>>>> content into multiple bind points of template. But recently I read >>>>>>> that this tag is deprecated. What alternatives are available? >>>>>>> P.S. I would propose <lift:insert at="bindPointName"> tag for this >>>>>>> purpose. And the contents of <lift:bind name="bindPointName"> tag >>>>>>> should be assumed as default if none <lift:insert ...> tag overrides >>>>>>> it. >> >>> -- >>> Lift, the simply functional web frameworkhttp://liftweb.net >>> Beginning Scalahttp://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 >>> Follow me:http://twitter.com/dpp >>> Git some:http://github.com/dpp > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" 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/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
