On Sun, Jan 09, 2005 at 11:51:44PM +0900, Shinobu Kawai wrote: > Hi guys, > > > ah, i see what you're saying. hmm. perhaps it would help to change > > perspective. rather than see this as a true/false type evaluation, > > see it as a render/no-render situation. then the template engine is > > only responding to its own behavior rather than evaluating an external > > condition. in other words, it says "i didn't render this, so i should > > render this instead" (apologies for the anthropomorphizing). > > I'm +1 for Nathan's suggestion. It's simple, easy-to-understand, and > I don't see any backwards-compatibility issues on it (not that I saw > any in the first place). > > So the conditions for the #else part to be rendered would be one of: > - there were no elements to render > - the introspector failed to get an iterator > Am I getting this right? >
Seems to be all right, but in this case it would be nice to reword the guides in this sense. (#if #elseif #else - #foreach #else, as a render/no-render decision point, which is intuitively well known, but the usual semantics of IF, ELSE et al. supresses that sense.) incze --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
