Re: [Mason] Component paths

2006-10-28 Thread Malcolm J Harwood
On Thursday 26 October 2006 20:00, Robert Hicks wrote: > > http://www.masonbook.com/book/chapter-2.mhtml#TOC-ANCHOR-2 > Yes I get that. That isn't my point though. I was thinking more about > being able to declare somewhere that "MASON_LIBS => 'lib/'" and then I > could just pass the components a

Re: [Mason] Component paths

2006-10-27 Thread Robert Hicks
Andreas Marienborg wrote: > On 27. okt. 2006, at 02.00, Robert Hicks wrote: > >> Todd Grimason wrote: >>> * Robert Hicks [2006-10-26 11:35]: In reading the online book I see paths being passed like "/lib/ comp.mas" and similar stuff. Since in that example the components are in th

Re: [Mason] Component paths

2006-10-27 Thread Andreas Marienborg
On 27. okt. 2006, at 02.00, Robert Hicks wrote: > Todd Grimason wrote: >> * Robert Hicks [2006-10-26 11:35]: >>> In reading the online book I see paths being passed like "/lib/ >>> comp.mas" >>> and similar stuff. Since in that example the components are in the >>> "/lib" directory can you not

Re: [Mason] Component paths

2006-10-26 Thread Robert Hicks
Todd Grimason wrote: > * Robert Hicks [2006-10-26 11:35]: >> In reading the online book I see paths being passed like "/lib/comp.mas" >> and similar stuff. Since in that example the components are in the >> "/lib" directory can you not tell Mason where to look so you only have >> to call "comp

Re: [Mason] Component paths

2006-10-26 Thread Todd Grimason
* Robert Hicks [2006-10-26 11:35]: > In reading the online book I see paths being passed like "/lib/comp.mas" > and similar stuff. Since in that example the components are in the > "/lib" directory can you not tell Mason where to look so you only have > to call "comp.mas"? > The paths are re

Re: [Mason] Component paths, "Custom tags", and philosophy?

2006-02-09 Thread Marius Feraru
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Allen S. Rout wrote: > I've had a bright idea, and I'm trying to determine if it's in fact > not so bright. :) IMHO your message failed to prove any "bright" idea. What it did in fact was to merely summarize HM's "bright" component-based design :)) >