> > >
> > > I keep going round and round in my head about this.  I keep 
> > > wondering if there is a clean way to introduce this w/o breaking 
> > > templates.
> >
> > The easiest way would be to introduce new operators.
> 
> -1   uh... no.  please, no.

+1 on your -1 from me! :)
 
> i'm not opposed to having some minor B.C. breaks in 1.5.  if 
> we make clear public note of them, then we can just point 
> that out to those who don't pay attention and coming whining 
> to the user list.
> 
> if people are relying on  #set( $foo = 5 / 2 )  to make 
> "$foo" == '2', then chances are they're doing 
> not-very-proper-designer-ish things to begin with. even if 
> it's legit stuff, it means that they should be savy enough to 
> repair their templates when upgrading to 1.5 (assuming we 
> properly warn of this).

We should always keep in mind though, that upgrading might
be a hard thing to do if you have a lot of templates. For the
number issue it would be good to have a switch like "Warn if
changed numerical handling detected" and then add checks to
the operators, that put a warning into the logfile, if there
are false results (like 5/2). This would happen at runtime of
course (since you cannot do this without a lot of false positives
while parsing).

OTOH I think that we should take the chance to eliminate all
the "flaws" we find like whitespace handling (#* *# different
than ##) and escaping. So we should only have ONE release that
breaks something... But that's clear I think. 
 
Regards,

Peter


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to