> Anyway, I kinda like "provide", but I like "final_content_for" > better. Mostly, I feel like the call to this method should *finalize* > the content for that key, meaning you could do something like this: > > content_for :foo, "bar" > final_content_for :foo, "baz" > > Then if you called "content_for :foo" or "final_content_for :foo" > again, Rails would raise an exception. Calling "yield :foo" would > output "barbaz". > > Otherwise, content_for and provide (or whatever it ends up being > called) could be kept entirely separate, though I feel that could be > somewhat confusing for people, but maybe I'm wrong (?). > > What are people's thoughts re: name and re: behavior wrt content_for > and the new, automatic-flushing api?
It would be awesome to have it working as you described. +1. About naming and api; how about: content_for :foo, "bar" and then: content_for :foo, "baz", :flush => true or content_for :foo, "baz", :finalize => true or content_for :foo, "baz", :freeze => true Robert Pankowecki -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en.
