ns_register_adptag and ns_adp_registeradp are different; the former causes an ADP string to be invoked upon encountering the tag, and the latter causes a Tcl proc to be invoked. My guess is that ns_adp_registertag is too confusing, because it's name is close to the former, but it's a synonym for the latter. I think this should probably be fixed in code someday, but for now the focus is on the docs, and I'm thinking that ns_adp_registertag should be deprecated in favor of ns_adp_registeradp, while continuing to endorse ns_register_adptag.
On Wednesday, December 4, 2002, at 05:40 PM, Scott S. Goodwin wrote:
There are actually three commands, all point to NsTclRegisterAdpCmd and have an identical effect: "ns_register_adptag", NsTclRegisterTagCmd, NULL "ns_adp_registeradp", NsTclRegisterAdpCmd, NULL "ns_adp_registertag", NsTclRegisterAdpCmd, NULL ns_register_adptag and ns_adp_registeradp ought to be considered deprecated. /s. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter M. Jansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 4:29 PM Subject: [AOLSERVER] ns_adp_registertag or ns_adp_registercmd?Another one. Both of these commands are registered, and run the same code, and the code does not appear to differentiate between the two. The current HTML docs define ns_adp_registertag, but do not define ns_adp_registertag. Should both be defined, with ns_adp_registercmd marked as deprecated? (I think it's a good idea to document all of the commands, even if they are deprecated, as long as they're in the code base. Deprecated commands and functions should be clearly marked as such. )
