Barry Warsaw wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-08-18 at 14:07, Fernando Perez wrote:
>
>> I'd like to argue that this form may be the most useful for common tasks, so
>> you can mix and match "this is foo: $foo and this is foo.bar: $foo.bar"
>> without having to worry too much about which template class you are using.
>
> It might be, but using attribute lookup syntax can be problematic. I
> can only relate my experiences with Mailman, where I've been using
> something similar for several years, albeit with traditional
> %-placeholders.
[...]
I trust your judgment an openness on this, and indeed prudence has served python
well in the past. I'd just like this to be available so I could handle a very
common case like:
'a local var: $var, and some object params: $self.x, $self.y, $self.z'
This can't easily be solved with the current syntax of %()s, since the
namespaces for self (self.__dict__) and locals are different, and there's no
attribute lookup.
How about making template objects callable (or providing an eval() method)? It
would allow the following:
tpl = template('a var $foo')
print tpl -> evaluates under the current rules, by calling __str__
but:
tpl2 = template('local: $var and attr: $self.x')
print tpl2() # or tpl2.eval(), or whatever other name
where the call has _optional_ local/global arguments? This could satisfy the
common case while allowing evaluation in restricted contexts:
print tpl2(my_locals,my_globals)
Anyway, just some thoughts on this...
Best regards,
Fernando
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4