"Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[ snip aimless chatter ;) ]
> I don't quite get you here. Can you provide an example? Are you saying
> something like :
>
> #set $foo = #tablerow( $a $b )
>
> such that
>
> <table>
> $foo
> </table>
>
> outputs (for example)
>
> <table>
> <tr><td color=$a>$b</td></tr>
> </table>
>
> (assuming what tablerow does, of course...)
>
> Actually, that's *very* possible, if you want the LHS of the #set
> assignment simply to 'catch' what the VM would render. If time allows,
> I will try to hack that together tonight and see how well it works.
> This is, of course, subject to no great opposition from the list
> members, but I don't think this is very far at all from #set $foo =
> $somecontexttool.blargh($a,$b), so I can't see why it would be a bad
> thing.
With the introduction of a feature like this, next thing you know,
people will start "programming" in VTL. I thought that the whole idea
behind the Velocimacro was to present an actual interface to reusable
VTL snippets that would otherwise just be #parse'd templates with
misc. variables set in the containing template evaluated in the #parse'd
markup (i.e. to prevent coupling).
I like the interface that Velocimacros give to #parse, but worry about
the introduction of too many programmatic features to a templating
system. I think that LHS assignment of a Velocimacro evaluation may be
going too far.
--
Daniel Rall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
