On 1 Oct 2010, at 18:46, Moritz Baumann wrote:
>> I think the next step would be to work out syntax exactly:
> Hm, that page mentions a lot more than just logical operators. I guess that’s
> what the negative feedback was about, not logical operators inside
> The main difference between PHPTAl and other template engines is that the
> is quite simple and that the templates look "clean". IMHO, function calls and
> equivalent to the ?: operator would add unnecessary complexity to PHPTAL and
> spoil exactly what makes PHPTAL unique and great. Support for logical
> inside tal:condition, on the other hand, would make the php: modifier more or
> less unnecessary.
I look at this differently: these are things I need, whether their syntax is
nice or not, so I'd prefer to make their syntax nicer.
Perhaps arguments to functions is a step too far (and authors should be
required to write expression modifiers for these), but setting of class name
based on condition is a very common pattern and ternary operator is an awful
way to do it.
PHPTAL mailing list