tame/tamer/tests/xmli/template/expected.xml

210 lines
5.3 KiB
XML
Raw Normal View History

<package xmlns="http://www.lovullo.com/rater"
xmlns:c="http://www.lovullo.com/calc"
xmlns:t="http://www.lovullo.com/rater/apply-template">
<template name="_empty_" desc="Empty" />
<template name="_with-static-identified_"
desc="Template with identified expressions">
<rate yields="tplStaticA">
<c:sum />
</rate>
<classify as="tpl-static-b">
<any />
</classify>
</template>
<template name="_with-static-unidentified_"
desc="Unidentified expressions in body">
<c:sum>
<c:product />
</c:sum>
</template>
<template name="_with-static-mix_"
desc="Both identified and unidentified that may or may
not be reachable in expansion context">
<c:product>
<c:sum />
</c:product>
<rate yields="tplStaticMix" />
<rate yields="tplStaticMixEnd">
<c:product />
</rate>
</template>
<template name="_short-hand-nullary_" desc="No params" />
<apply-template name="_short-hand-nullary_" />
<template name="_short-hand-unary_" desc="One param" />
<apply-template name="_short-hand-unary_">
<with-param name="@foo@" value="bar" />
</apply-template>
<template name="_short-hand-nary_" desc="N params" />
<apply-template name="_short-hand-nary_">
<with-param name="@foo@" value="bar" />
<with-param name="@bar@" value="baz" />
<with-param name="@baz@" value="quux" />
</apply-template>
tamer: nir::tplshort: Desugar body into @values@ This represents a significant departure from how the XSLT-based TAME handles the `@values@` param, but it will end up having the same effect. It builds upon prior work, utilizing the fact that referencing a template in TAMER will expand it. The problem is this: allowing trees in `Meta` would add yet another container; we have `Pkg` and `Tpl` already. This was the same problem with template application---I didn't want to add support for binding arguments separately, and so re-used templates themselves, reaching the generalization I just mentioned above. `Meta` is intended to be a lexical metasyntatic variable. That keeps its implementation quite simple. But if we start allowing trees, that gets rather complicated really quickly, and starts to require much more complex AIR parser state. But we can accomplish the same behavior by desugaring into an existing container---a template---and placing the body within it. Then, in the future, we'll parse `param-copy` into a simple `Air::RefIdent`, which will expand the closed template and produce the same result as it does today in the XSLT-based system. This leaves open issues of closure (variable binding) in complex scenarios, such as in templates that introduce metavariables to be utilized by the body. That's never a practice I liked, but we'll see how things evolve. Further, this does not yet handle nested template applications. But this saved me a ton of work. Desugaring is much simpler. The question is going to be how the XSLT-based compiler responds to this for large packages with thousands of template applications. I'll have to see if it's worth the hit at that time, or if we should inline it when generating the `xmli` file, producing the same `@values@` as before. But as it stands at this moment, the output is _not_ compatible with the current compiler, as it expects `@values@` to be a tree, so a modification would have to be made there. DEV-13708
2023-03-23 14:40:40 -04:00
<template name="_short-hand-nullary-body_" desc="Nullary with body" />
tamer: nir::tplshort: Desugar body into @values@ This represents a significant departure from how the XSLT-based TAME handles the `@values@` param, but it will end up having the same effect. It builds upon prior work, utilizing the fact that referencing a template in TAMER will expand it. The problem is this: allowing trees in `Meta` would add yet another container; we have `Pkg` and `Tpl` already. This was the same problem with template application---I didn't want to add support for binding arguments separately, and so re-used templates themselves, reaching the generalization I just mentioned above. `Meta` is intended to be a lexical metasyntatic variable. That keeps its implementation quite simple. But if we start allowing trees, that gets rather complicated really quickly, and starts to require much more complex AIR parser state. But we can accomplish the same behavior by desugaring into an existing container---a template---and placing the body within it. Then, in the future, we'll parse `param-copy` into a simple `Air::RefIdent`, which will expand the closed template and produce the same result as it does today in the XSLT-based system. This leaves open issues of closure (variable binding) in complex scenarios, such as in templates that introduce metavariables to be utilized by the body. That's never a practice I liked, but we'll see how things evolve. Further, this does not yet handle nested template applications. But this saved me a ton of work. Desugaring is much simpler. The question is going to be how the XSLT-based compiler responds to this for large packages with thousands of template applications. I'll have to see if it's worth the hit at that time, or if we should inline it when generating the `xmli` file, producing the same `@values@` as before. But as it stands at this moment, the output is _not_ compatible with the current compiler, as it expects `@values@` to be a tree, so a modification would have to be made there. DEV-13708
2023-03-23 14:40:40 -04:00
<apply-template name="_short-hand-nullary-body_">
<with-param name="@values@" value="___dsgr-bb5___" />
tamer: nir::tplshort: Desugar body into @values@ This represents a significant departure from how the XSLT-based TAME handles the `@values@` param, but it will end up having the same effect. It builds upon prior work, utilizing the fact that referencing a template in TAMER will expand it. The problem is this: allowing trees in `Meta` would add yet another container; we have `Pkg` and `Tpl` already. This was the same problem with template application---I didn't want to add support for binding arguments separately, and so re-used templates themselves, reaching the generalization I just mentioned above. `Meta` is intended to be a lexical metasyntatic variable. That keeps its implementation quite simple. But if we start allowing trees, that gets rather complicated really quickly, and starts to require much more complex AIR parser state. But we can accomplish the same behavior by desugaring into an existing container---a template---and placing the body within it. Then, in the future, we'll parse `param-copy` into a simple `Air::RefIdent`, which will expand the closed template and produce the same result as it does today in the XSLT-based system. This leaves open issues of closure (variable binding) in complex scenarios, such as in templates that introduce metavariables to be utilized by the body. That's never a practice I liked, but we'll see how things evolve. Further, this does not yet handle nested template applications. But this saved me a ton of work. Desugaring is much simpler. The question is going to be how the XSLT-based compiler responds to this for large packages with thousands of template applications. I'll have to see if it's worth the hit at that time, or if we should inline it when generating the `xmli` file, producing the same `@values@` as before. But as it stands at this moment, the output is _not_ compatible with the current compiler, as it expects `@values@` to be a tree, so a modification would have to be made there. DEV-13708
2023-03-23 14:40:40 -04:00
</apply-template>
<template name="___dsgr-bb5___"
desc="Desugared body of shorthand template application of `_short-hand-nullary-body_`">
tamer: nir::tplshort: Desugar body into @values@ This represents a significant departure from how the XSLT-based TAME handles the `@values@` param, but it will end up having the same effect. It builds upon prior work, utilizing the fact that referencing a template in TAMER will expand it. The problem is this: allowing trees in `Meta` would add yet another container; we have `Pkg` and `Tpl` already. This was the same problem with template application---I didn't want to add support for binding arguments separately, and so re-used templates themselves, reaching the generalization I just mentioned above. `Meta` is intended to be a lexical metasyntatic variable. That keeps its implementation quite simple. But if we start allowing trees, that gets rather complicated really quickly, and starts to require much more complex AIR parser state. But we can accomplish the same behavior by desugaring into an existing container---a template---and placing the body within it. Then, in the future, we'll parse `param-copy` into a simple `Air::RefIdent`, which will expand the closed template and produce the same result as it does today in the XSLT-based system. This leaves open issues of closure (variable binding) in complex scenarios, such as in templates that introduce metavariables to be utilized by the body. That's never a practice I liked, but we'll see how things evolve. Further, this does not yet handle nested template applications. But this saved me a ton of work. Desugaring is much simpler. The question is going to be how the XSLT-based compiler responds to this for large packages with thousands of template applications. I'll have to see if it's worth the hit at that time, or if we should inline it when generating the `xmli` file, producing the same `@values@` as before. But as it stands at this moment, the output is _not_ compatible with the current compiler, as it expects `@values@` to be a tree, so a modification would have to be made there. DEV-13708
2023-03-23 14:40:40 -04:00
<c:product>
<c:sum />
</c:product>
</template>
<template name="_short-hand-nary-body_" desc="N-ary with body" />
tamer: nir::tplshort: Desugar body into @values@ This represents a significant departure from how the XSLT-based TAME handles the `@values@` param, but it will end up having the same effect. It builds upon prior work, utilizing the fact that referencing a template in TAMER will expand it. The problem is this: allowing trees in `Meta` would add yet another container; we have `Pkg` and `Tpl` already. This was the same problem with template application---I didn't want to add support for binding arguments separately, and so re-used templates themselves, reaching the generalization I just mentioned above. `Meta` is intended to be a lexical metasyntatic variable. That keeps its implementation quite simple. But if we start allowing trees, that gets rather complicated really quickly, and starts to require much more complex AIR parser state. But we can accomplish the same behavior by desugaring into an existing container---a template---and placing the body within it. Then, in the future, we'll parse `param-copy` into a simple `Air::RefIdent`, which will expand the closed template and produce the same result as it does today in the XSLT-based system. This leaves open issues of closure (variable binding) in complex scenarios, such as in templates that introduce metavariables to be utilized by the body. That's never a practice I liked, but we'll see how things evolve. Further, this does not yet handle nested template applications. But this saved me a ton of work. Desugaring is much simpler. The question is going to be how the XSLT-based compiler responds to this for large packages with thousands of template applications. I'll have to see if it's worth the hit at that time, or if we should inline it when generating the `xmli` file, producing the same `@values@` as before. But as it stands at this moment, the output is _not_ compatible with the current compiler, as it expects `@values@` to be a tree, so a modification would have to be made there. DEV-13708
2023-03-23 14:40:40 -04:00
<apply-template name="_short-hand-nary-body_">
<with-param name="@bar@" value="baz" />
<with-param name="@baz@" value="quux" />
<with-param name="@values@" value="___dsgr-c6c___" />
tamer: nir::tplshort: Desugar body into @values@ This represents a significant departure from how the XSLT-based TAME handles the `@values@` param, but it will end up having the same effect. It builds upon prior work, utilizing the fact that referencing a template in TAMER will expand it. The problem is this: allowing trees in `Meta` would add yet another container; we have `Pkg` and `Tpl` already. This was the same problem with template application---I didn't want to add support for binding arguments separately, and so re-used templates themselves, reaching the generalization I just mentioned above. `Meta` is intended to be a lexical metasyntatic variable. That keeps its implementation quite simple. But if we start allowing trees, that gets rather complicated really quickly, and starts to require much more complex AIR parser state. But we can accomplish the same behavior by desugaring into an existing container---a template---and placing the body within it. Then, in the future, we'll parse `param-copy` into a simple `Air::RefIdent`, which will expand the closed template and produce the same result as it does today in the XSLT-based system. This leaves open issues of closure (variable binding) in complex scenarios, such as in templates that introduce metavariables to be utilized by the body. That's never a practice I liked, but we'll see how things evolve. Further, this does not yet handle nested template applications. But this saved me a ton of work. Desugaring is much simpler. The question is going to be how the XSLT-based compiler responds to this for large packages with thousands of template applications. I'll have to see if it's worth the hit at that time, or if we should inline it when generating the `xmli` file, producing the same `@values@` as before. But as it stands at this moment, the output is _not_ compatible with the current compiler, as it expects `@values@` to be a tree, so a modification would have to be made there. DEV-13708
2023-03-23 14:40:40 -04:00
</apply-template>
<template name="___dsgr-c6c___"
desc="Desugared body of shorthand template application of `_short-hand-nary-body_`">
tamer: nir::tplshort: Desugar body into @values@ This represents a significant departure from how the XSLT-based TAME handles the `@values@` param, but it will end up having the same effect. It builds upon prior work, utilizing the fact that referencing a template in TAMER will expand it. The problem is this: allowing trees in `Meta` would add yet another container; we have `Pkg` and `Tpl` already. This was the same problem with template application---I didn't want to add support for binding arguments separately, and so re-used templates themselves, reaching the generalization I just mentioned above. `Meta` is intended to be a lexical metasyntatic variable. That keeps its implementation quite simple. But if we start allowing trees, that gets rather complicated really quickly, and starts to require much more complex AIR parser state. But we can accomplish the same behavior by desugaring into an existing container---a template---and placing the body within it. Then, in the future, we'll parse `param-copy` into a simple `Air::RefIdent`, which will expand the closed template and produce the same result as it does today in the XSLT-based system. This leaves open issues of closure (variable binding) in complex scenarios, such as in templates that introduce metavariables to be utilized by the body. That's never a practice I liked, but we'll see how things evolve. Further, this does not yet handle nested template applications. But this saved me a ton of work. Desugaring is much simpler. The question is going to be how the XSLT-based compiler responds to this for large packages with thousands of template applications. I'll have to see if it's worth the hit at that time, or if we should inline it when generating the `xmli` file, producing the same `@values@` as before. But as it stands at this moment, the output is _not_ compatible with the current compiler, as it expects `@values@` to be a tree, so a modification would have to be made there. DEV-13708
2023-03-23 14:40:40 -04:00
<c:sum>
<c:product />
</c:sum>
</template>
<template name="_short-hand-nullary-outer_"
desc="Outer template holding an inner" />
<apply-template name="_short-hand-nullary-outer_">
<with-param name="@values@" value="___dsgr-d50___" />
</apply-template>
<template name="___dsgr-d50___"
desc="Desugared body of shorthand template application of `_short-hand-nullary-outer_`">
<template name="_short-hand-nullary-inner-dfn-inner_"
desc="Inner template applied inner" />
<apply-template name="_short-hand-nullary-inner-dfn-inner_" />
</template>
<template name="_short-hand-nullary-inner-dfn-outer_"
desc="Define template outer but apply inner" />
<apply-template name="_short-hand-nullary-outer_">
<with-param name="@values@" value="___dsgr-ea4___" />
</apply-template>
<template name="___dsgr-ea4___"
desc="Desugared body of shorthand template application of `_short-hand-nullary-outer_`">
<apply-template name="_short-hand-nullary-inner-dfn-outer_" />
</template>
<template name="_short-hand-unary-with-body_"
desc="Unary with body" />
<apply-template name="_short-hand-unary-with-body_">
<with-param name="@foo@" value="bar" />
<with-param name="@values@" value="___dsgr-f6b___" />
</apply-template>
<template name="___dsgr-f6b___"
desc="Desugared body of shorthand template application of `_short-hand-unary-with-body_`">
<template name="_short-hand-unary-with-body-inner_"
desc="Inner template" />
<apply-template name="_short-hand-unary-with-body-inner_" />
</template>
<template name="_short-hand-in-expr_"
desc="Template to be applied within an expression" />
<rate yields="shortHandTplInExpr">
<apply-template name="_short-hand-in-expr_">
<with-param name="@in@" value="rate" />
</apply-template>
</rate>
<template name="_tpl-with-short-hand-inner_"
desc="Template with a shorthand application in its body">
<template name="_tpl-with-short-hand-inner-inner_" />
<apply-template name="_tpl-with-short-hand-inner-inner_" />
<c:sum>
<apply-template name="_tpl-with-short-hand-inner-inner_">
<with-param name="@in@" value="sum" />
</apply-template>
</c:sum>
</template>
<template name="_match-child_" desc="Template with a match child">
<match on="foo" value="TRUE" />
</template>
<template name="_tpl-param_" desc="Template with a param">
<param name="@foo@" desc="A parameter" />
<param name="@bar@" desc="Another parameter" />
</template>
<template name="_tpl-param_body_"
desc="Template with params with bodies">
<param name="@text@" desc="A param with a literal">
<text>lonely foo</text>
</param>
<param name="@ref@" desc="A param with a ref">
<param-value name="@text@" />
</param>
<param name="@both@" desc="A param with both literal and ref">
<text>foo </text>
<param-value name="@text@" />
<text> bar</text>
</param>
</template>
</package>