* though not technically a parser feature, I think our if/else
syntax makes more logical sense -- this is a total religious
debate though
For the record, Mike is wrong on this one. The WOML syntax is
correct.
I think it's fairly obviously that Drew and I are going to require
counseling to resolve this one ...
Uh oh ... the votes are starting :)
The defense of my position is that, to me, the Wonder style more
closely matches how an if/else appears in code:
<wo:if condition="whatever">
do something
</wo:if>
<wo:else>
do something else
</wo:else>
seems to nicely match:
if (whatever) {
// do something
} else {
// do something else
}
whereas the 5.4 conditional style is:
<wo:if condition="whatever">
do something
<wo:else>
do something else
</wo:else>
</wo:if>
which would be equivalent to:
if (whatever) {
// do something
else {
// do something else
}
}
it seems weird to me that the else is INSIDE the if conditional ... if
the if-conditional evaluates to false, i intuitively expect nothing
inside the if to render, but that's not what 5.4 does. admittedly,
this is super nit-picky, and anyone using either style would find the
other to be weird, probably.
alas, we have "legacy code" in BOTH ways now, because (as with inline
bindings) both sides developed the features without knowledge of the
other.
ms
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to [email protected]
