[stringtemplate-interest] proposed "ignore newlines" template syntax

[Jonathan Buhacoff]

I think ... ::= <<< ... >>>  is ok.  But I'll throw a couple of other ideas out there:

Characters at the beginning will be easy to extend later with other options.

For example, ... ::= w<<...>>   might mean ignore whitespace.  Later you might want ... ::= wgx<<...>>  to turn on ignore whitespace and two other hypothetical options named "g" and "x". 

Or allow full option names enclosed by some other symbol:   ... ::= [whitespace g xtra]<<. ... >>

Jonathan


On Apr 4, 2011, at 2:09 AM, Terence Parr wrote:

> Hi. There is a proposal to create special syntax that allows arbitrary formatting within a template that does not result in new lines in the output. This is useful when you have a really complicated template with IFs and such that needs to generate output all on the same line. Currently, this can be quite challenging. There's no way to read a huge template on one line. Sam Harwell and I came up with a potential solution: a new <<<...>>> triple angle bracket template that ignores newlines unless you use <\n> inside.
> 
> Here's a simple example:
> 
> ruleRef(rule,label,elementIndex,args,scope) ::= <<
> <if(label)><label>=<endif><if(scope)><scope:delegateName()>.<endif><rule.name>(<args; separator=", ">);
>>> 
> 
> it would probably be easier to read like this:
> 
> ruleRef(rule,label,elementIndex,args,scope) ::= <<<
> <if(label)>
> <label>=
> <endif>
> <if(scope)>
> <scope:delegateName()>.
> <endif>
> <rule.name>(<args; separator=", ">);
>>>> 
> 
> come to think of it, perhaps it should also ignore whitespace so that I could indent the conditionals:
> 
> ruleRef(rule,label,elementIndex,args,scope) ::= <<<
> <if(label)>
> 	<label>=
> <endif>
> <if(scope)>
> 	<scope:delegateName()>.
> <endif>
> <rule.name>(<args; separator=", ">);
>>>> 
> 
> We while the syntax to be close, but still recognizable as different than the usual <<...>>. I believe that there has been a proposal for special characters at the start of the template and the addition of keyword but I think a new template and closure syntax is better.
> 
> thoughts?
> 
> Thanks,
> Ter
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> stringtemplate-interest mailing list
> stringtemplate-interest at antlr.org
> http://www.antlr.org/mailman/listinfo/stringtemplate-interest