On 2 oct. 2014, at 14:35, Josh Smeaton <[email protected]> wrote:
> - The pluggable solution works well when you have a common interface, but a > different implementation in the backend. Have you thought about how to > support differences in syntax (interface) between various templating > libraries? Yes, I have. Preliminary research shows that all common templates engines except Django support variants of this pattern: loader = TemplateLoader(**CONFIG) template = loader.load(NAME) html = template.render(**CONTEXT) So I'm confident that it's possible to provide a reasonable API that can be implemented with any decent template engine. > - Do you imagine that jinja templates can be used side-by-side, or will > authors have to ship a set of templates for each engine they decide to > support? One project will be able use different engines to render different templates. Authors of pluggable apps can ship any kind of template, however, they should describe which engines they require. -- Aymeric. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/BE372B39-1893-4188-8AC7-4AC854FBE38E%40polytechnique.org. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
