Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-19 Thread Vinay Sajip
On Sep 19, 4:16 pm, "Jacob Kaplan-Moss" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 4:15 AM, Vinay Sajip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are philosophical differences between Django and Jinja > > templating about how much power there should be in the templating > > engine.

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-19 Thread Jacob Kaplan-Moss
On Fri, Sep 19, 2008 at 4:15 AM, Vinay Sajip <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There are philosophical differences between Django and Jinja > templating about how much power there should be in the templating > engine. Django's philsophy is to keep the power to the minimum > required - "templates are

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-19 Thread Andreas
What really annoys me is all the talk about how important it is that its designed for non-programmers but if i recall corectly jacob said on djangocon that they never aimed for making django a general purpose webframework, they just made something that fit their needs. With that said, how many

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-19 Thread Vinay Sajip
On Sep 17, 11:52 pm, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 14:42 +0100, Ben Ford wrote: > > I take it that most are aware of: > > >http://lucumr.pocoo.org/cogitations/2008/09/16/why-jinja-is-not-djang... > > > It seems like a very well thought out and thorough

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-18 Thread Armin Ronacher
On Sep 18, 12:52 am, Malcolm Tredinnick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 14:42 +0100, Ben Ford wrote: > Parts of it are very well thought out and if it had been a post on "how > Jinja works" it would have been excellent. Other parts are completely > unconstrained by facts or

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-17 Thread zvoase
I guess so, but also from the overall *feel* of using it; I find myself switching into Lisp mode when I use it. That probably makes no sense, but it's just this feeling I had. I guess it feels as though there's some big eval/apply machine behind it all. And the fact that templates are compiled to

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-17 Thread [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If I follow you are saying that it is lispy in that flow control statements and functions are handled just the same way(meaning you can define your own statements if you like)? On Sep 17, 8:02 pm, zvoase <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't know if anyone's noticed, but the templating language

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-17 Thread zvoase
I don't know if anyone's noticed, but the templating language seems (at least from a usage standpoint) to be a lot like a Lisp interpreter. I know that sounds completely weird and random, but it's true. It's like a very small subset of Scheme or something (the small subset thing is necessary

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-17 Thread Malcolm Tredinnick
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 14:42 +0100, Ben Ford wrote: > I take it that most are aware of: > > http://lucumr.pocoo.org/cogitations/2008/09/16/why-jinja-is-not-django-and-why-django-should-have-a-look-at-it/ > > It seems like a very well thought out and thorough write up. Um .. welll. :-( Parts

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-17 Thread Ben Ford
I take it that most are aware of: http://lucumr.pocoo.org/cogitations/2008/09/16/why-jinja-is-not-django-and-why-django-should-have-a-look-at-it/ It seems like a very well thought out and thorough write up. Ben 2008/9/17 Johannes Dollinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Would

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-17 Thread Johannes Dollinger
> Would @register.tag(token_stream=True) work instead, or am I missing > something? Yes, that would work. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-16 Thread Simon Willison
On Sep 16, 7:36 pm, Johannes Dollinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > @register.tag > @uses_token_stream > def mytag(parser, bits): >      expr = bits.parse_expression(required=True) >      return MyNode(expr) > > `uses_token_stream` replaces the Token argument to the parser   > function with a

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-16 Thread Malcolm Tredinnick
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 20:36 +0200, Johannes Dollinger wrote: > Why should django.template be refactored? Filter and Variable parsing > is inconsistent. Many ad hoc parsers in defaulttags are fragile. > Whitespace handling is ungraceful. > > The patch provided in #7806[1] splits __init__.py

Re: RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-16 Thread Brian Beck
On Sep 16, 2:36 pm, Johannes Dollinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why should django.template be refactored? Filter and Variable parsing > is inconsistent. Many ad hoc parsers in defaulttags are fragile. > Whitespace handling is ungraceful. > > The patch provided in #7806[1] splits __init__.py

RFC: django.template refactoring (#7806)

2008-09-16 Thread Johannes Dollinger
Why should django.template be refactored? Filter and Variable parsing is inconsistent. Many ad hoc parsers in defaulttags are fragile. Whitespace handling is ungraceful. The patch provided in #7806[1] splits __init__.py into separate modules[2] and introduces a TokenStream class that