Feature/conditional block #22
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
+1, having to make a new method for checking whether something is empty before iterating over it is quite annoying. (I hope this is what I think it is O_o) |
|
the way i implemented it is actually not for iteration. For iteration, usually, this should work, depending on the truthiness semantics of your implementation language Where is clear that you want to iterate over products. I use the above for things like: |
|
I've implemented the ? tag but didn't do the else. Looks like a reasonable idea to me. |
|
+1 |
Closed
|
It appears that d5c6d4e does not belong into this pull request. |
ghost
pushed a commit
to devurandom/lustache
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 28, 2017
Explicit conditional blocks are e.g. necessary to support introducing the
expansion of a list with an optional header, like in the following example:
```mustache
{{?products}}
Product names:
{{#products}}
- {{name}}
{{/products}}
{{/products}}
{{^products}}
No products
{{/products}}
```
See-Also: mustache/spec#22
See-Also: mustache/spec#55 (comment)
ghost
pushed a commit
to devurandom/lustache
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 28, 2017
Explicit conditional blocks are e.g. necessary to support introducing the
expansion of a list with an optional header, like in the following example:
```mustache
{{?products}}
Product names:
{{#products}}
- {{name}}
{{/products}}
{{/products}}
{{^products}}
No products
{{/products}}
```
I did not include tests, because their data is included in the corresponding
pull request to the Mustache spec.
See-Also: mustache/spec#22
See-Also: mustache/spec#55 (comment)
ghost
mentioned this pull request
ghost
pushed a commit
to devurandom/lustache
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 1, 2017
Explicit conditional blocks are e.g. necessary to support introducing the
expansion of a list with an optional header, like in the following example:
```mustache
{{?products}}
Product names:
{{#products}}
- {{name}}
{{/products}}
{{/products}}
{{^products}}
No products
{{/products}}
```
I did not include tests, because their data is included in the corresponding
pull request to the Mustache spec.
See-Also: mustache/spec#22
See-Also: mustache/spec#55 (comment)
ghost
pushed a commit
to devurandom/lustache
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 1, 2017
Explicit conditional blocks are e.g. necessary to support introducing the
expansion of a list with an optional header, like in the following example:
```mustache
{{?products}}
Product names:
{{#products}}
- {{name}}
{{/products}}
{{/products}}
{{^products}}
No products
{{/products}}
```
I did not include tests, because their data is included in the corresponding
pull request to the Mustache spec.
See-Also: mustache/spec#22
See-Also: mustache/spec#55 (comment)
|
What was the reason for closing this? |
|
Just closing after 5 years to clean up my open pull request view :)
… On Aug 22, 2017, at 1:55 PM, Dennis Schridde ***@***.***> wrote:
What was the reason for closing this?
—
You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#22 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAH1uYpMQ5448W36uVDOk3kJr0m4en1Pks5sasGwgaJpZM4LwmW5>.
|
|
Shall I submit the patch in a new pull request? |
|
Sure, go ahead. I’m happy to reopen the pull-requests too if that is easier?
|
|
That would probably be easier, yes. Are you still maintaining the specification and do you plan to make changes like these? |
|
Oh I’m not the maintainer of mustache, and in fact I haven’t done any web development in the last 5 years. I don’t see myself working on this any time in the future either.
… On Aug 23, 2017, at 1:57 PM, Dennis Schridde ***@***.***> wrote:
That would probably be easier, yes. Are you still maintaining the specification and do you plan to make changes like these?
—
You are receiving this because you modified the open/close state.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#22 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAH1uSQ7otAOh-hSe4Iw0OZcKdKNahnoks5sbBOegaJpZM4LwmW5>.
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I'm writing a compiler, and for efficiency purposes (and also template "clarity", in that i can see when a conditional is meant rather than iteration/lambda/new context/conditional), I decided to add a {{?test}} construct that can be used for conditionals. Also allows a kind of shortcut syntax {{?test}}then{{^test}}else{{/test}}.
let me know what you think.