Hello,
One of the nice things about php is that the '<?>' keys are close to each other. One of the annoying things about asp and jsp is that '<>' use one hand, and '%' uses another.
Attached is a patch to erb.rb that allows ?'s as well as %'s in erb templates:
<% puts "this works" %>
<? puts "as does this" ?>
Let me know if there is anything I can do to make this a better patch. If you want to play with this, you can grab the patched version of erb from narf:
http://svn.narf-lib.org/svn/narf/trunk/lib/web/phprb.rb
I renamed the constant to PHPRB, so as not to collide with the standard lib.
Cheers,
Patrick
+1 in concept, because XML standards suggest it this way, too. However,
<?ruby is better, following the XML processing-instructions spec.
···
On Tue, 2005-01-18 at 06:39 +0900, Patrick May wrote:
Hello,
One of the nice things about php is that the '<?>' keys are close to
each other. One of the annoying things about asp and jsp is that '<>'
use one hand, and '%' uses another.
Attached is a patch to erb.rb that allows ?'s as well as %'s in erb
templates:
<% puts "this works" %>
<? puts "as does this" ?>
Hello,
I’ve had some trouble sending the patch over. It is available here:
http://www.narf-lib.org/php.erb.patch
Cheers,
Patrick
That's because you're using the wrong keyboard. Switch to dvorak layout. 
Its even easier than <?, because you're not using your pinky to hit one of the keys.
(No, really this kinda stuff is useful. 
PGP.sig (186 Bytes)
···
On 17 Jan 2005, at 13:39, Patrick May wrote:
Hello,
One of the nice things about php is that the '<?>' keys are close to each other. One of the annoying things about asp and jsp is that '<>' use one hand, and '%' uses another.
--
Eric Hodel - drbrain@segment7.net - http://segment7.net
FEC2 57F1 D465 EB15 5D6E 7C11 332A 551C 796C 9F04
> <? puts "as does this" ?>
+1 in concept, because XML standards suggest it this way, too. However,
<?ruby is better, following the XML processing-instructions spec.
or just, <?r ?>
(The PHP people say not to use shorttags (<?= $var ?>) too, there was
a zend contest here the 2nd place guy got put down to 6th for that!
And the best prizes were in the top 5 
)
Douglas
Why bother? I don't think something like
<a href="foo/?baz=<?ruby print xyz.poo(42) ?>">
is valid XML either.
···
On 2005-01-17 22:42:32, Aredridel wrote:
+1 in concept, because XML standards suggest it this way, too. However,
<?ruby is better, following the XML processing-instructions spec.
Btw, this is EXACTLY what Nitro uses:
<?r if user.role("admin") ?>
....
<?r end ?>
or even
<?ruby .... ?>
or even
<ruby>...</ruby>
check this out: www.rubyforge.com/projects/nitro
<?rb ?> gets my vote
Douglas Livingstone wrote:
···
<? puts "as does this" ?>
+1 in concept, because XML standards suggest it this way, too. However,
<?ruby is better, following the XML processing-instructions spec.
or just, <?r ?>
(The PHP people say not to use shorttags (<?= $var ?>) too, there was
a zend contest here the 2nd place guy got put down to 6th for that!
And the best prizes were in the top 5 )
Douglas
Douglas Livingstone ha scritto:
<? puts "as does this" ?>
+1 in concept, because XML standards suggest it this way, too. However,
<?ruby is better, following the XML processing-instructions spec.
or just, <?r ?>
+1 for <?r (which IIRC is Nitro's way of doing things
Why bother? I don't think something like
<a href="foo/?baz=<?ruby print xyz.poo(42) ?>">
is valid XML either.
but,
<a href="foo/?baz=#{xyz.poo(42)}">...</a>
as used in Nitro is valid xml
-G.
<a href="foo/?baz=23" <?ruby if xyz.poo(42) ?> target="moep"
<?ruby else ?> title="Example" <?ruby end ?>>
···
On 2005-01-18 10:21:14, George Moschovitis wrote:
Why bother? I don't think something like
<a href="foo/?baz=<?ruby print xyz.poo(42) ?>">
is valid XML either.
but,
<a href="foo/?baz=#{xyz.poo(42)}">...</a>
as used in Nitro is valid xml
gabriele renzi <rff_rff@remove-yahoo.it> writes:
Douglas Livingstone ha scritto:
<? puts "as does this" ?>
+1 in concept, because XML standards suggest it this way, too. However,
<?ruby is better, following the XML processing-instructions spec.
or just, <?r ?>
+1 for <?r (which IIRC is Nitro's way of doing things
Get pragmatic and allow both <?r and <?ruby.
···
--
Christian Neukirchen <chneukirchen@gmail.com> http://chneukirchen.org