Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Here's the actual code PR https://github.com/django/django/pull/2556 On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 1:26 AM, Martijn van Oosterhout wrote: > > On 12 March 2016 at 05:31, Curtis Maloney wrote: > > I think this conversation needs to come to a conclusion, and that

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 12 March 2016 at 05:31, Curtis Maloney wrote: I think this conversation needs to come to a conclusion, and that >> conclusion should be simple. Several people have asked a very simple >> question of the purists: what is the "correct" way of writing tags which >> by nature

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 12/03/16 11:47, Nathan Cox wrote: I don't understand why this conversation has had to go on for this long. The original post was in February of 2012, and it is now March of 2016. That's four years of discussion that basically boils down to a couple of purists insisting that their coding

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Funkybob (Curtis Maloney) implemented a multiline template tag patch nearly two years ago. He asked for feedback a number of times and received none. I think there's enough support here that if someone were to implement a patch, it'd probably be accepted. Adding the same argument as to why

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

I don't understand why this conversation has had to go on for this long. The original post was in February of 2012, and it is now March of 2016. That's four years of discussion that basically boils down to a couple of purists insisting that their coding style is the only coding style, fits

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

+1 from me. blocktrans is really ugly if it has to fit in one line. On Saturday, February 18, 2012 at 7:04:33 AM UTC+1, Glenn Washburn wrote: > > Hello django devers, > > I'd like to reopen discussion on the multiline tag issue (see: > https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8652) which was closed

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

I'm working on a project trying to internationalise all the templates and ran into this problem today, with the blocktrans tag as mentioned earlier. Since the DEP doesn't appear to be going anywhere, I'd like to suggest some alternatives which might be more palatable. Since the problem appears

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Let me rephrase -- Where do I voice support that I too would like this feature? Here, on the DEP pull request, on the original ticket? I get that there is a difference between core devs voting and non core devs voicing support, and that +1 from a core dev is a vote whereas +1 from a non-core

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Technically I'd think only core devs would vote. So neither here or there would make a diff imo. P.S.: That said I am not sure we have a formal policy on how we act on DEPs yet (or maybe I should just read DEP 001 more carefully ;)) Cheers, Florian On Wednesday, April 30, 2014 4:02:26 AM

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Now that there is a DEP, where do we voice our support (cast +1 votes)? Here, on the DEP pull request, on the original ticket? T On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 10:14:25 PM UTC-4, Loic Bistuer wrote: > > On Thursday, April 17, 2014 5:47:10 AM UTC+7, Josh Smeaton wrote: >> >> And for the last

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Thursday, April 17, 2014 5:47:10 AM UTC+7, Josh Smeaton wrote: > > And for the last month or so a patch has existed and feedback has been > requested. Performance was one of the concerns mentioned, so download > Curtis' patch, and test that it works for your use case. He has asked for >

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

And for the last month or so a patch has existed and feedback has been requested. Performance was one of the concerns mentioned, so download Curtis' patch, and test that it works for your use case. He has asked for feedback a number of times. Unless you try it out, I fear that you won't be

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:46 PM, imfletcher wrote: > to say this shouldn't be supported because its not aesthetically pleasing > is beyond bizarre, IMO. If you don't like it, keep it on one line. If you > are so offended by it that you cannot stand seeing it, ask your team

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Judging by some of the comments here, you would think that the request is: "everyone MUST break their tags into multiple lines in all cases" this is a request to support the *optional* ability to break tags across lines *in some cases* where it makes sense. the use cases are clear. the

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Curtis, I added a thumbnail example to the DEP (pull request in github). On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Loic Bistuer wrote: > Curtis' branch is now a PR: > > https://github.com/django/deps/pull/3 > > Feedback is welcome. > > -- > Loic > > > On Wednesday, April 16,

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Curtis' branch is now a PR: https://github.com/django/deps/pull/3 Feedback is welcome. -- Loic On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 11:17:58 AM UTC+7, Curtis Maloney wrote: > > Now taking input and feedback: > > https://github.com/funkybob/deps/blob/master/drafts/multiline_tags.rst > -- You

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Now taking input and feedback: https://github.com/funkybob/deps/blob/master/drafts/multiline_tags.rst On 16 April 2014 14:15, Loic Bistuer wrote: > On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 10:36:00 AM UTC+7, Adrian Holovaty wrote: >> >> Hey, may I suggest writing this up using

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 10:36:00 AM UTC+7, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > > Hey, may I suggest writing this up using our new DEP process? I don't mean > to make people jump through hoops, but it would be useful for people like > me who haven't been following the issue and don't want to wade

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

I'm happy to coalesce this into a DEP... is there a format template I can follow? On 16 April 2014 13:46, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Adrian Holovaty > wrote: > > Hey, may I suggest writing this up using our new

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Adrian Holovaty wrote: > Hey, may I suggest writing this up using our new DEP process? I don't mean > to make people jump through hoops, but it would be useful for people like me > who haven't been following the issue and don't want to wade

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Hey, may I suggest writing this up using our new DEP process? I don't mean to make people jump through hoops, but it would be useful for people like me who haven't been following the issue and don't want to wade through dozens of mailing-list messages, comment threads, patches, etc. Here's more

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Tuesday, April 15, 2014 6:05:50 AM UTC+2, Loic Bistuer wrote: > > > In that respect, is it still worth investing time on DTL? It's an > interesting question generally, but it applies here particularly because > such a switch would fix this very issue. > To my knowledge nobody is actively

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

I'm +1 on this. I do "forms in the templates" with a `{% field %}` templatetag that controls labels, placeholders, help_texts, etc.; The lack of multilines statements makes it rather painful. It's interesting to note that Jinja2 supports this and we may be switching to it as the default

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Would it help if I said please? On 4 April 2014 11:29, Curtis Maloney wrote: > Have any of you tested my code which gives you multi-line tags? > > I'd be interested in hearing how it fares "in the real world" > > -- > C > > > > On 4 April 2014 01:52, dude

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Have any of you tested my code which gives you multi-line tags? I'd be interested in hearing how it fares "in the real world" -- C On 4 April 2014 01:52, dude wrote: > More useful example is not ‘very long with’, just a situation with html > code block, which have in left

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

More useful example is not ‘very long with’, just a situation with html code block, which have in left sir already offset about 60 cols. And when we add there any django template tag with params it goes exceed 80 lines (for standard). But we can use 120 of course. In real life html tree can be

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Hmm, that does seem like a great idea! On Thu, Apr 3, 2014 at 10:17 AM, dude wrote: > Very good idea i think! > > Many people love format source codes to be beauty. But they can’t because > django templates does’t support multiline tags. > > > 03 апр. 2014 г., в 21:13,

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Very good idea i think! Many people love format source codes to be beauty. But they can’t because django templates does’t support multiline tags. 03 апр. 2014 г., в 21:13, Daniele Procida написал(а): > On Thu, Apr 3, 2014, Carl wrote: > >> As someone

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Thu, Apr 3, 2014, Carl wrote: >As someone said earlier in the thread, making Python programmers deal with >long lines seems like some special form of torture ;) My own use case is this: {% with placeholder_width=960 generic_main_width=523 sidebar_image_size="294x196"

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Hi Russell, A brief example to answer your question... On Monday, 19 August 2013 00:59:13 UTC+1, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > > >> I wondered if you are using internationalisation? If so have you run into >> the same problems or is it easy to circumvent for you? >> > > I'm not using it

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

+1 for me too On Thursday, March 6, 2014 3:28:59 PM UTC-5, Andre Terra wrote: > > +1, for one simple reason: practicality beats purity. > > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Daniel Ellis > wrote: > >> +1 - I've had the same issue with sorl thumbnail. >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 5,

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

For those interested, I've now got my branch working, and only failing tests related to ensuring no newlines appear inside tags. You can see the diff here : https://github.com/funkybob/django/compare/multiline-templates Now comes the great discovery phase to see how many real-world templates

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

To try to help the wider community know to contribute comments, I've included this thread in the latest Django Update. My personal stance is -- I know I can add this to the template code trivially (See my django-contemplation sandpit). However, I'm not certain: a) What performance impact it may

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

+1, for one simple reason: practicality beats purity. On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Daniel Ellis wrote: > +1 - I've had the same issue with sorl thumbnail. > > > On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:07 AM, Adam Serafini wrote: > >> +1 for multiline template

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

+1 - I've had the same issue with sorl thumbnail. On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 7:07 AM, Adam Serafini wrote: > +1 for multiline template tags > > Regarding: "we want to discourage putting business logic in the template" > > Long template tags can happen even if they are

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

+1 for multiline template tags Regarding: "we want to discourage putting business logic in the template" Long template tags can happen even if they are logic-less, and they would read much nicer over several lines. For example: {% cloudinary main_image.image width=300 height=300

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Wim Feijen wrote: > Hi Jacob and Adrian, > > Reading this long thread with many +1s makes me think of truncatechars > which is not a good feeling. > It's important to remember that the truncatechars example wasn't anywhere near as simple as

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Hi Jacob and Adrian, Reading this long thread with many +1s makes me think of truncatechars which is not a good feeling. I wondered if you are using internationalisation? If so have you run into the same problems or is it easy to circumvent for you? Or am I missing something and are all

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 9:41 PM, Daniel Ellis wrote: > My grandfather was a developer in a nuclear plant that I was interning at. > They used a Django-based web interface for internal operations. > > One of the functions their Django application managed was the release of >

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

My grandfather was a developer in a nuclear plant that I was interning at. They used a Django-based web interface for internal operations. One of the functions their Django application managed was the release of nuclear material. While building the application, my grandfather put the following

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Daniel Ellis wrote: > Is it considered gauche to revive old topics such as this? It's not, but my opinion hasn't changed -- I'm still -1, and so's Adrian. So unless you've got something really convincing, an argument that hasn't been

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Is it considered gauche to revive old topics such as this? After having some difficulty debugging why an if statement was throwing a strange error, I realized it was because they didn't support multi-line statements. Here's what I was trying: {% if request.xxx.family.get_selected.get_age <

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

before we lay this discussion to rest, I would like the dissenters to feast your eyes on this great new feature that *you have approved*: http://www.scribd.com/doc/57270484/Djangocon-EU-2011-Revised-Form-Rendering-Lightning-Talk-by-Gregor-Mullegger and don't forget, this *is coming soon* (at

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Feb 28, 11:05 pm, Nick Phillips wrote: > On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 08:27 -0700, Carl Meyer wrote: > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > On 02/23/2012 11:29 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > > This thread contains 6 people expressing support for

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Fri, 2012-02-24 at 08:27 -0700, Carl Meyer wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 02/23/2012 11:29 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > > This thread contains 6 people expressing support for this change, and > > 2 against (a BDFL, a core developer) -- and you can add me

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 2/26/2012 12:12 AM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote: After Ned's message, I'm -0, because while I'm not fond of multi-line tags, I cannot offer a good alternative when it comes to multi-line "with" tags. On Feb 25, 6:48 pm, Ned Batchelder wrote: On 2/24/2012 11:55 PM, Yo-Yo Ma

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Sorry all, I think I got my conversations mixed up. I was thinking this was the whitespace conversation also going on. 2012/2/26 Łukasz Rekucki > On 26 February 2012 05:55, Joe & Anne Tennies wrote: > > While this would be a valid argument if Django

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

воскресенье, 26 февраля 2012 г. 15:38:33 UTC+6 пользователь Łukasz Rekucki написал: > > On 26 February 2012 05:55, Joe & Anne Tennies wrote: > > While this would be a valid argument if Django templates only rendered > HTML, > > that is not the only thing it can be used to

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Sunday, February 26, 2012 at 4:54 AM, Łukasz Rekucki wrote: > On 26 February 2012 06:12, Yo-Yo Ma (mailto:baxterstock...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > After Ned's message, I'm -0, because while I'm not fond of multi-line > > tags, I cannot offer a good alternative when it

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 26 February 2012 06:12, Yo-Yo Ma wrote: > After Ned's message, I'm -0, because while I'm not fond of multi-line > tags, I cannot offer a good alternative when it comes to multi-line > "with" tags. Let's not forget that until Django 1.3, {% with %} accepted only one

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Sunday, February 26, 2012 at 4:38 AM, Łukasz Rekucki wrote: > On 26 February 2012 05:55, Joe & Anne Tennies (mailto:tenn...@gmail.com)> wrote: > > While this would be a valid argument if Django templates only rendered HTML, > > that is not the only thing it can be used to

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 26 February 2012 05:55, Joe & Anne Tennies wrote: > While this would be a valid argument if Django templates only rendered HTML, > that is not the only thing it can be used to render. > The original poster gave a very good example of a text-based email. This is pretty much

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

After Ned's message, I'm -0, because while I'm not fond of multi-line tags, I cannot offer a good alternative when it comes to multi-line "with" tags. On Feb 25, 6:48 pm, Ned Batchelder wrote: > On 2/24/2012 11:55 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote:> I'm -1 on this for s specific reason;

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

While this would be a valid argument if Django templates only rendered HTML, that is not the only thing it can be used to render. The original poster gave a very good example of a text-based email. I could list lots of other formats in which white space must be followed to even be useful (like

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 2/24/2012 11:55 PM, Yo-Yo Ma wrote: I'm -1 on this for s specific reason; If you need multiple lines for a tag, you're doing it wrong. import this This would be far more helpful feedback if you would take the examples of too-long tags presented in this thread, and show the "right" way to

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

*Not* +1 on this. Using extensively Django since the beginning and had never felt the need to break a tag on several lines. HTML does not meant to be written like any programming language (80 cols and so on) and the philosophy of the Django template language has never been to expose a

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

> Folks, you seem to have missed Russell's point. Even if 100 people +1 > this, it's meaningless. That's a tiny fraction of this mailing list's > readership, much less of the Django community at large. If the maintainers of Django want to make a personal taste-based decision rather than a

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 24 February 2012 17:16, Alex Gaynor wrote: > > > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:06 PM, h3 wrote: > >> > If you'd like to make an argument as to *why* it's useful, that's >> useful, but we don't take polls. >> >> I think the argument as to why it's

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:06 PM, h3 wrote: > > If you'd like to make an argument as to *why* it's useful, that's > useful, but we don't take polls. > > I think the argument as to why it's useful as been made quite > extensively. > > On the flip side, beside the ivory tower

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

> If you'd like to make an argument as to *why* it's useful, that's useful, but > we don't take polls. I think the argument as to why it's useful as been made quite extensively. On the flip side, beside the ivory tower philosophical stance, I did not see much compelling argument as to *why*

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 24 February 2012 17:29, Łukasz Rekucki wrote: > With all the voting and aesthetic discussion, maybe let's get back to > technical details: > > On 24 February 2012 05:18, colinta wrote: >> 1) It's an easy fix. > > Maybe it is, I can only judge a specific

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

With all the voting and aesthetic discussion, maybe let's get back to technical details: On 24 February 2012 05:18, colinta wrote: > 1) It's an easy fix. Maybe it is, I can only judge a specific patch, > 2) It's backwards compatible. Right now, tags are free to parse the

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

+1 and reason as previously stated: it makes sense to brake down very long tags for readability purposes. From: Alex Gaynor Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 10:12 AM To: django-developers@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: Revisiting multiline tags On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Daniel

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 3:12 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote: > Folks, you seem to have missed Russell's point.  Even if 100 people +1 this, > it's meaningless.  That's a tiny fraction of this mailing list's readership, > much less of the Django community at large.  Django is the way

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Mark me a +1 on this as well. Many of us don't ask for items in discussion that have been marked as "won't fix" because we don't realize that the decisions on these items can be reversed. Thanks, Paul On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 2:19 AM, Bradley Ayers wrote: > > On

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/23/2012 11:29 PM, Russell Keith-Magee wrote: > This thread contains 6 people expressing support for this change, and > 2 against (a BDFL, a core developer) -- and you can add me to the -0 FWIW, I'd forgotten how painful the single-line

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Alex Gaynor wrote: > > Folks, you seem to have missed Russell's point.  Even if 100 people +1 this, > it's meaningless.  That's a tiny fraction of this mailing list's readership, > much less of the Django community at large.  Django is the

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 10:01 AM, Daniel Moisset wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Stephan Jaensch wrote: > >> This thread contains 6 people expressing support for this change, and 2 > against (a BDFL, a core developer) -- and you can add me to

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Stephan Jaensch wrote: >> This thread contains 6 people expressing support for this change, and 2 >> against (a BDFL, a core developer) -- and you can add me to the -0 list. >> There are over 6000 subscribers to django-developers. I put it to

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Since we're consensus building or whatever the fancy term is, another +1. Mainly for comments, since {# #} is far, far more readable than {% comment %}{% endcomment %} even with syntax highlighting, but also for other tags too, particularly long i18n ones -- or even relatively short ones where

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 02/24/2012 01:29 PM, Chris Northwood wrote: > A +1 from me too, I've really felt the pain on this when doing i18n > templates, I understand the aesthetics, but the aesthetics of > obscenely long tags is also bad imo... > > On 24 February 2012 09:23, Shawn Milochik wrote:

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 02/24/2012 10:01 AM, Stephan Jaensch wrote: This thread contains 6 people expressing support for this change, and 2 against (a BDFL, a core developer) -- and you can add me to the -0 list. There are over 6000 subscribers to django-developers. I put it to you that the vast majority of

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

+1 from me too - I've used {# #} across line boundaries before and wondered why it didn't work, since it didn't seem especially clear that this doesn't work nor why it doesn't work - I'd just substituted for the obvious and eventually just deleted the offending HTML. On Feb 24, 2012 9:30 AM,

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

A +1 from me too, I've really felt the pain on this when doing i18n templates, I understand the aesthetics, but the aesthetics of obscenely long tags is also bad imo... On 24 February 2012 09:23, Shawn Milochik wrote: > On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Bradley Ayers

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 4:19 AM, Bradley Ayers wrote: > > In the interest of making the wider community opinion heard, I too am +1 on > this, my feeling is exactly the same as Stephen. > > -- +1 I understand that a BDFL has spoken and this change isn't going to happen.

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 24/02/2012, at 7:01 PM, Stephan Jaensch wrote: >>> 1) It's an easy fix. >>> 2) It's backwards compatible. >>> 3) It has no impact on performance. >>> 4) LOTS of people want it. >>> >>> and most importantly >>> >>> 5) We could stop asking for it. >>> >>> This issue is

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

>> 1) It's an easy fix. >> 2) It's backwards compatible. >> 3) It has no impact on performance. >> 4) LOTS of people want it. >> >> and most importantly >> >> 5) We could stop asking for it. >> >> This issue is such an easy "sure, why not!?" >> >> Please, O benevolent dictators, listen to the

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On 24/02/2012, at 12:18 PM, colinta wrote: > 1) It's an easy fix. > 2) It's backwards compatible. > 3) It has no impact on performance. > 4) LOTS of people want it. > > and most importantly > > 5) We could stop asking for it. > > This issue is such an easy "sure, why not!?" > > Please, O

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

1) It's an easy fix. 2) It's backwards compatible. 3) It has no impact on performance. 4) LOTS of people want it. and most importantly 5) We could stop asking for it. This issue is such an easy "sure, why not!?" Please, O benevolent dictators, listen to the populous, and heed their cry. --

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

I think regardless of our personal preferences on the aesthetics on template tags, the final decision to split them in multiple lines should be made by users. If there are no cons in implementing such a change and the patch really is only six characters long, then it seems like a no-brainer to

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Not to harp on about this, but I never understood not supporting multi- line tags, in particular if it doesn't affect performance and really is as straightforward as suggested by the OP. Yes, they are only useful in a limited set of cases (albeit "rare" may be overstating it), but so are

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

> Personally, I would like to be able to see a tag all at once (that is > without scrolling), even though I might have to scroll to get to the > start of it.  I believe this improves readability of the template. My > specific use case is with include tags with long template paths and > added

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Glenn Washburn wrote: > I'd like to reopen discussion on the multiline tag issue (see: > https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8652) which was closed 3 three > years ago as "won't fix".  The last comment notes that this won't > happen

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi Glenn, On 02/19/2012 07:06 PM, Glenn Washburn wrote: > Very brief I might add. He only alludes to one technical reason > saying: "error trapping can occur much earlier". I'm trying to > understand what is meant by this as well. I don't see how

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 19 Feb 2012 10:01:06 -0700 Carl Meyer wrote: > Here's a discussion linked from #3888 in which Malcolm lays out in > brief why multiline tags have been rejected: >

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/19/2012 10:20 AM, Torsten Bronger wrote: > I've made the same observations as in the parallel posting: I18n > becomes awkward with single-line tags. We have dozens of lines like > > {% blocktrans with

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

Here here! I think the django templating language is unnecessarily restrictive in many places, but this one *really* boggles me. Give me back my whitespace! (please) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group,

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 02/17/2012 11:04 PM, Glenn Washburn wrote: > I'd like to reopen discussion on the multiline tag issue (see: > https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8652) which was closed 3 three > years ago as "won't fix". The last comment notes that this won't >

Re: Revisiting multiline tags

I would also like to know more about the rational behind ditching the idea of multilinetags. {% trans with varname=myobject.proprety1 someothervar=myobject.some.other_property yetanothervar=myotherobject.with_a_painfully_long_method_name "Even with line-wrap, it's a pain to

Revisiting multiline tags

Hello django devers, I'd like to reopen discussion on the multiline tag issue (see: https://code.djangoproject.com/ticket/8652) which was closed 3 three years ago as "won't fix". The last comment notes that this won't happen as the decision has been made many times. But there is no link to any