Re:Why Htmx Does Not Have a Build Step
by benatkin on Friday August 25, 2023 @02:36PM
(#37265509)
Wouldn't that conflict with possible future optional static typing? It's only Stage 1. I'm hoping it doesn't make it.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Why Htmx Does Not Have a Build Step
by Someone1234 on Friday August 25, 2023 @03:06PM
(#37265861)
Can you explain why the two proposals would "conflict?" Seems like they're proposing the same thing to me.
It would be hard to separate ignored ones from ones that would use a possible future optional static typing system. They would possibly have to use a different, uglier syntax.
Re:Why Htmx Does Not Have a Build Step
by Someone1234 on Friday August 25, 2023 @05:06PM
(#37267049)
I'm not sure I follow. Both proposals are suggesting that browser's engines ignore the syntax completely to allow some other, external, process to check them.
They use slightly different wording but are describing the same basic idea: This syntax will be ignored entirely and then optional/other process can use this area for whatever.