Le dimanche 19 février 2023 à 06:44 -0800, Vinnie Falco via Boost a écrit :

On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 5:28 AM Klemens Morgenstern via Boost wrote:

...

Julien & Vinnie voted to REJECT based on the state of the library, which makes me believe they might change their vote in a future review.

I have complete confidence that the next time we see this library it will "walk on water" so to speak.

That's correct for me as well. From the last messages of Peter, I understand that strict mustache conformance is not a goal. The addition of a filter like mechanism as an extension to the spec, and probably some way to differently treat first/last item of a sequence like someone suggested, would drastically change the usefulness of this library. At least for me it would change from “I can't use it” to “it's not ideal, but it's useful”.

Thank you to Peter and Klemens for your time investment.

Yes, many thanks to both. Regards, Julien

On 21/02/2023 03:20, Peter Dimov wrote:

Since Mustache is so simple and so... not rigidly defined, it's easy to implement something Mustache-like but not quite. I didn't want that.

It does feel like a bit of a half-baked language, though. It mixes a lot of presentation aspects into the input data model instead of the template (where it should rightly be), probably mostly because in JS it's more commonplace to morph input data since it's all free-form anyway. As such it doesn't really seem like a language that ought to be implemented in anything but JS.

Mateusz Loskot wrote:

On Sun, 19 Feb 2023 at 14:27, Klemens Morgenstern. wrote:

...

First I want to thank Peter for the submission and all reviewers for their participation in the review process.

Klemens, thank you for your efforts, priceless!

I hope, Peter will consider re-submission of his Mustache ;) in not too distant future.

Well this one has been mercilessly shaved by the reviewers so I'll need some time to grow another.