search

bem / bh

BH template engine
http://bem.github.io/bh/
MIT License
68 stars 31 forks source link

Fix bug with matchers order #141

Closed 1999 closed 9 years ago

1999 commented 9 years ago

fixes #140

coveralls commented 9 years ago

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at 100.0% when pulling 01f4e1221d95cd35da5dcc0639b5c5747fb96397 on 1999:bug/matches-order-fail into ee446ea5801a60cc4e2fc8e3622cd1bfaf0f729a on bem:master.

tadatuta commented 9 years ago

now there's a way to manage priority by order (and one can use {must,should}Deps for that). but with this patch there won't be any possibility to make block templates of more priority then it's modifiers. sure it's hard to find such real life examples but still now developer has control and afterward he won't have.

1999 commented 9 years ago

I'm pretty sure that [any] template engine (in fact, any library) must not depend on any other technology, such as deps from BEM. It should be a simple thing and work as expected without using any other libraries unless this is announced.

qfox commented 9 years ago

@1999 Then swap your matchers as I showed in #140. It's a talk about nothing.

blond commented 9 years ago

@1999 This change breaks the habitual behavior and can break a lot of existing code.

What problems are solved this PR? Could you give real examples?

1999 commented 9 years ago

@blond https://github.com/bem/bh/issues/140#issue-67565390 @mishanga said once that bh.match() order should not affect result HTML. This is wrong now, and PR is about to fix this behaviour.

mishanga commented 9 years ago

Отписался в issue.