RE: html macro library

Yes - but then I'd need to pass all of the args for directiveB through
the call of directiveA, wouldn't I?

For example...

#(directiveA $argForA)
        $argForA
#end

#(directiveB $argForB)
        $argForB
#end

If directiveA calls directiveB, Wouldn't I need to redefine directiveA
to be
#(directiveA $argForA $argForB)
        $argForA
        #directiveB ($argForB)
#end
?
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Dekany [mailto:ddekany@xxxxxxxxxxx] 
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 1:55 PM
To: Velocity Users List
Subject: Re: html macro library


Friday, May 30, 2003, 6:38:52 PM, Kevin Bolton wrote:

> Hey Jonathan,
>
> Thank you for your response and I'm with you on the need for 
> #directiveA(#directiveB)).  It'd also be mighty handy to be able to 
> overload methods.  That is have methods with the same name with 
> different arguments.

That should not look like that. That should be:

#directiveA()
  #directiveB
#end

but the parser will not know that directiveA supports body, so it has a
corresponding #end... a trap of the VTL syntax.

-- 
Best regards,
 Daniel Dekany



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: velocity-user-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: velocity-user-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


-----------------------------------------
The information contained in this message may be privileged, confidential, and 
protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended 
recipient, or any employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to 
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, 
distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by 
replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. 

Thank you. Paychex, Inc.