W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-script-coord@w3.org > October to December 2011

Re: Reviving E4X (H4E)?

From: ☻Mike Samuel <msamuel@google.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Oct 2011 15:55:06 -0500
Message-ID: <CAHBJ-bkmFS5D+ertPH7x-XoqbvR90ksoDxdJPCE5V-pTSxX37A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com>
Cc: Brendan Eich <brendan@mozilla.org>, "Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Rafael Weinstein <rafaelw@google.com>, Adam Klein <adamk@google.com>, Erik Aarvidson <arv@google.com>
On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 13:46, Allen Wirfs-Brock <allen@wirfs-brock.com> wrote:
> why not "template" for the general form and "string template" for the
> unprefixed form.?
> Allen
> On Oct 19, 2011, at 10:44 AM, Brendan Eich wrote:
> On Oct 19, 2011, at 9:11 AM, Mark S. Miller wrote:
> [+msamuel]
> On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 1:31 AM, Alex Russell <slightlyoff@google.com>
> wrote:
>> I have a larger concern here, which is that we're implicitly forcing
>> literals to be XML, while the rest of the document is HTML. The closer
>> we can get to HTML for something like this, the better (IMO).
> To emphasize Alex's point here, quasi-literals provides a mechanism for
> avoiding injection attacks in any language for which you have a quasi-parser
> -- whether XML, HTML, SQL, RegExp, or whatever -- all for the price of one
> bit of additional syntactic sugar and no new semantics. Both vastly lighter
> than E4X and vastly more useful.
> E4X is dead. Long live quasi-literals!
> I love quasis and don't mind their hunchback-like name, but others say it is
> a scary unknown neologism. Can we have a better term?
> For the unprefixed `... ${...} ...` form we could say "string
> interpolation". That's a mouthful but it is a known phrase.
> Sorry to bikeshed the name! If that's the biggest problem (and it may be),
> well done to you and Mike.
> /be

I'm happy with either "string interpolation" or "template".  I can't
find "template" in FutureReservedWord, but I thought it was in there.
If so it would be odd to have a language feature named "template" but
not have any relation to the future reserved word.
Received on Thursday, 20 October 2011 09:04:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:14:04 UTC