Re: Mason 2.0 thoughts

On Sun, 13 May 2007, Hans Dieter Pearcey wrote:

>> If only we had a syntax for this ...
>>
>>   <&| Cache, ... cache flags ... &>
>>
>>   [some component content]
>>
>>   </&>
>
> Maybe a new block type and some flags.
>
> <%cache key="0xdeadbeef" expires_in="5 min">
> [content]
> </%cache>
>
> I think that using flags for (basically) arbitrary data would end up being a
> huge nightmare, though, unlike the <%args validate=PV> example given on the
> wiki.
>
> Is there a reason that something like this wouldn't work?

I don't get why people think we'd need something new. This can be done 
as-is with the current Mason using the component-with-content feature. 
That's what I was suggesting in my original message.


-dave

/*===================================================
VegGuide.Org                        www.BookIRead.com
Your guide to all that's veg.       My book blog
===================================================*/

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/