On 27 September 2020 09:22:48 BST, Nicolas Grekas
wrote:
>Hi Benjamin, hi everyone
>
>I'm wondering if the syntax that allows for several attributes is
>really
>future-proof when considering nested attributes:
>
>
>*1.*
>#[foo]
>#[bar]
>
>VS
>
>
>*2.*
>#[foo, bar]
>Shouldn't we remove syntax
On Sun, Sep 27, 2020 at 10:23 AM Nicolas Grekas
wrote:
> Hi Benjamin, hi everyone
>
> I'm wondering if the syntax that allows for several attributes is really
> future-proof when considering nested attributes:
>
I feel this question is what an RFC for nested attributes has to weigh. We
have
On 27 September 2020 09:22:48 BST, Nicolas Grekas
wrote:
>The A. syntax is consistent with the 1. list.
>I feel like syntax B is not desired and could be confusing from a
>grammar
>pov.
>BUT in syntax 2., we allow an attribute to be unprefixed (bar), so that
>syntax B is consistent with 2.
I
Hi Benjamin, hi everyone
I'm wondering if the syntax that allows for several attributes is really
future-proof when considering nested attributes:
*1.*
#[foo]
#[bar]
VS
*2.*
#[foo, bar]
Add nested attributes to the mix, here are two possible ways:
*A.*
#[foo(
#[bar]
)]
or
*B.*
