On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:29 AM, Brian Neal <bgn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm using a recent checkout of Django trunk.
>
> If I have a template "test.html" which is this:
>
> {{ rowcolors }}
>
> the only way I could make cycle and include behave together is to do
> this:
>
> {% for obj in page.object_list %}
> <!-- {% cycle 'odd' 'even' as rowcolors %} -->
> {% include 'test.html' %}
> {% endfor %}
>
> I thought that perhaps the new "silent" keyword would eliminate the
> need to HTML comment out the cycle tag:
>
> {% for obj in page.object_list %}
> {% cycle 'odd' 'even' as rowcolors silent %}
> {% include 'test.html' %}
> {% endfor %}
>
> However, the very first time through the for loop, rowcolors is not
> set in the included template. It works on subsequent cycles though.
>
> Is there a way to make this work without having to HTML comment out
> the cycle tag output? Admittedly it's a minor annoyance.It looks like you may have discovered a problem with the silent flag as designed. The use you present is exactly what the silent flag was designed to address; but it appears that it doesn't actually hit that use case. I've just opened #15570 to track this problem, and since this is a new feature (which will require a backwards incompatible change to fix), it is a blocker for 1.3 final. The fix will be to make silent *always* put the value into context, but not render a value. This is the usage that your second sample suggests as appropriate usage. Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django users" group. To post to this group, send email to django-users@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to django-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-users?hl=en.
