On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 01:46:43PM -0400, Chuck Esterbrook wrote:
> >Supporting something comparable to dtml-in would be a major feature.
>
> Perhaps it would make sense to separate #for from #batch, which still
> providing additional power to #for.
How would this look? Would #batch be a super
At 09:55 AM 6/8/2001 -0700, Mike Orr wrote:
>Perhaps better would be to port dtml-in's batching capability. This would
>probably be a large project, however. #for would need keywords for the batch
>size and where to start. Then $foo.sequenceNumber() would be the relative
>index from the start o
On Fri, Jun 08, 2001 at 06:43:17AM -0400, Chuck Esterbrook wrote:
> My designers want to generate some links like:
> a | b | c
A common scenario and one TS should support.
>- Should we expand TS's #for with the power of ? (I think so.)
I've long supported this. I haven't personally h
Thanks Geoff,
that's way simpler than what came to my mind.
I you want to be stickly about whitespace:
#set separator = ''
#for $foo in $bars
$separator$foo #set separator = '| '
#end for
or if you don't mind introducing an extra \n after each $foo:
#set separator = ''
#for $foo in $bars
$separ
At 06:43 AM 6/8/2001 -0400, Chuck Esterbrook wrote:
>My designers want to generate some links like:
> a | b | c
>
>Note the vertical bars between the elements. My first cut is something like:
> #for $foo in $bars
> $bar |
> #end for
>
>But this gives:
>
My designers want to generate some links like:
a | b | c
Note the vertical bars between the elements. My first cut is something like:
#for $foo in $bars
$bar |
#end for
But this gives:
a | b | c |
DTML solves this by offering a higher-level for (c
