And not only newbies will have problems.
Even experienced developers (who try to join a large/complex tapestry
project) would spend extra time for decrypting bindings.
Br,
Norbi
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mind Bridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Tapestry development" <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 9:52 PM
Subject: Re: How to reach concensus w.r.t. default-binding?
Hi,
Just my 2c:
At the very least, the informal parameters must always be 'literal' in the
templates to eliminate involuntary mistakes by the designers. This is not
at stake at the moment, but the leap is not that great from there to
formal parameters.
Similar logic can be used for 'novice' users -- with default-binding they
will feel like they can only code by example, as involuntary mistakes
would be much more likely. Not having default-binding would make the code
a bit longer, but at least you would need far less knowledge to be
productive (which is what Tapestry is about).
In other words, a new developer could start working much faster, rather
than waste a lot of time to ponder what the templates mean.
Someone said that shorter does not always mean clearer, and I think that
in this case he is particularly right.
An unrelated matter: I would suggest to replace 'literal' with 'text' or
sth short like that -- 'literal' is just too long, albeit verbally
accurate.
-mb
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
