Re: extending <% | %>

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:37:55PM -0800, BenRifkah Bergsten-Buret wrote:
> However, I'm not sold that using the pipe to chain escapes is really 
> necessary.  I agree that the pipe symbol is great because it already 
> carries the desired meaning because its used in numerous other 
> contexts.  However, implementing it seems to me to be more trouble than 
> its worth especially since the comma is already implemented (and used in 
> the wild) for chaining escapes.

The problem is not having multiple pipes -- the problem is extending the syntax
of the pipe RHS.   As soon as you allow '| foo(<arbitrary perl>)', the pipe is
a problem, without any chaining entering the picture.

> P.S.: I actually like the first syntax because IMO it allows for more 
> effective separation of storage and display, but to each his own.

I was arguing for both being available; I focused on the merits of the inline
syntax because it's the new feature I want to add. 

hdp.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/