[Seaside-dev] GRCodecStream>>tab

[Norbert Hartl]

On 04.08.2010, at 01:49, Julian Fitzell wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 1:54 PM, Norbert Hartl <norbert at hartl.name> wrote:
>> 
>> On 03.08.2010, at 14:50, Lukas Renggli wrote:
>> 
>> On Tuesday, August 3, 2010, Paolo Bonzini <bonzini at gnu.org> wrote:
>> 
>> On 08/03/2010 02:45 PM, Norbert Hartl wrote:
>> 
>> I try to make a tool of mine more mature by utilizing grease for it.
>> 
>> But some tools I use like Sixx use tab: to indent XML in a stream. So
>> 
>> I'm wondering why GRCodecStream has GRCodecStream>>tab for a single
>> 
>> tab but not GRCodecStream>>tab: for multiple. What is the rationale
>> 
>> of the decision to include one and not the other?
>> 
>> 
>> Likely "no one thought about it". :)
>> 
>> Yeah, Seaside doesn't use it, so we didn't add it. Feel free to commit
>> a change and some new tests.
>> 
>> Well, to be honest I was fishing for reasons to dislike tab. This way I
>> would have ripped the usage of tab out of Sixx. What is the "policy" about
>> things being included in grease? Is it just that some needs it?
>> Norbert
> 
> No, the policy is that we try to keep it small and treat new additions
> somewhat suspiciously. That's despite Lukas' enthusiasm above. ;)
> 
> My goals with Grease are (roughly in order):
> 1) Make Seaside portable
> 2) Make platforms comfortable supporting Grease
> 3) Make Grease useful to other projects
> 
> (2) implies that need to keep what's in Grease free of load issues and
> as small as possible.
> (3) implies adding the most commonly used things (ie. the things that
> "everybody" adds in their own environments).
> 
> (1) implies that we add whatever Seaside needs and this is the most
> important thing. But we also try to adjust Seaside when possible to
> accommodate (2) and (3).
> 
> As for #tab:... (since you wanted opinions) I agree #tab is not
> essential, though it is somewhat convenient. #tab: is even less
> essential and I don't even really like its selector, if I'm being
> honest. It's also probably not that big a deal, however, particularly
> since it's on a GR-prefixed class. So, if pressed I would argue
> against it on principle until convinced otherwise, but I also don't
> really care if people want it added.
> 
Well, yes, I don't like neither tab nor tab: . So I removed every usage of tab, tab: and cr from Sixx. I decided the usage outweighs the ugliness of the code this time.

thanks,

Norbert