Do all of the syntaxes have to be integrated into the parser? Can't they be injected as modules? Say the RIFE default syntax is enabled and if they want a different syntax they specify it in a config or something? I don't see any reason to limit the syntax choices or any reason that they can't be included without a speed penalty.
Cheers, Tyler On 2/18/06, Eddy Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 18 Feb 2006, at 19:42, Geert Bevin wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > it seems that a lot of people that look at RIFE cringe when seeing > > the template tag syntax and don't delve deeper because of that. I > > thus think it's important to solve this and make the negativity go > > away, even if they might like the syntax later on. I thus worked > > out a bunch of alternatives that we could add. I'd love to get your > > input on these. Ideally I'd just implement them all, but I worry > > about parsing performance. > > > > Anyway, here they are: > > What I like most about RIFE is that the templating system is great. > Everything can be manipulated by code. I'd hate it if suddenly there > were a gazillion ways to do the same thing without actually bringing > any benefit. > > I feel like these proposals just beautify the code, but do not add > any real value. > > See my blog entry: http://coding.mu/archives/2006/02/19/developing- > web-applications-with-rife/ > > Eddy > _______________________________________________ > Rife-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.uwyn.com/mailman/listinfo/rife-users > _______________________________________________ Rife-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.uwyn.com/mailman/listinfo/rife-users
