What do you mean by "as a normal snippet"? That you will nest your snippet inside a special snippet? To me it seems worthwhile to have a consistency between the two syntax-wise, since they have some common denominator semantics-wise. Actually, maybe throw in eager_eval to the mix. Maybe we could have one eval or lift:eval or liftx:eval or whatever attribute, which can contain a space separated list of specifiers--eager, ajax, parellel.
------------------------------------- David Pollak<feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote: On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim <naftoli...@gmail.com>wrote: > > A snippet attribute can be invoked with something other than > lift:snippet="Class.method"? There's a short syntax? What is it? > There may be a short syntax (e.g., lift:Class.method) in the future. > What was used for the feature that inserts a snippet asynchronously via > Ajax? > That feature isn't done yet, but that feature is likely to be done as a normal snippet. > My concern is that as more features are thought up and added they shouldn't > all end up with different prefixes. > Also, if the prefix is nothing special I would go with the more verbose > "parallel" because otherwise it's not obvious what it does. If it's prefixed > with "lift:" at least you know it's a lift tag and you can look it up > somewhere or ask on the list etc. But if you come back to some old template > that says "do:par" you may be left clueless. > > > ------------------------------------- > David Pollak<feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 3:59 AM, Naftoli Gugenheim <naftoli...@gmail.com > >wrote: > > > > > Could that be changed to lift:concurrent or lift:par etc. (see email on > > scala-user from Marting Odersky mentioned the future use of 'seq' and > 'par' > > in concurrent collections)? > > Why use a different prefix than everything else built in to lift? And > > 'lazy' is arguably not what's happening. > > > > > We're using a different prefix because if we use a lift:xxx prefix, the > snippet execution machinery will be invoked on the attribute and we don't > want that. > > I'm cool with do:par unless anyone has a better suggestion. > > Thanks, > > David > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > ------------------------------------- > > Jeppe Nejsum Madsen<je...@ingolfs.dk> wrote: > > > > > > David Pollak <feeder.of.the.be...@gmail.com> writes: > > > > > I've added code (it's in review board right now) that will > automatically > > > farm any snippet with the "do:lazy='true'" attribute set. > > > > > > So, <lift:foo/> will execute the foo snippet inline. > > > > > > <lift:foo do:lazy="true"/> will execute the foo snippet in parallel and > > join > > > the result back to page before its rendered. > > > > Very nice! In what context is the snippet executed? I assume that > > all timeout handling, errors etc should be handled by the snippet just > > as in the non-lazy fashion? > > > > /Jeppe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net > Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 > Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp > Surf the harmonics > > > > > > -- Lift, the simply functional web framework http://liftweb.net Beginning Scala http://www.apress.com/book/view/1430219890 Follow me: http://twitter.com/dpp Surf the harmonics --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Lift" group. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org To unsubscribe from this group, send email to liftweb+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/liftweb?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---