On Dec 4, 2006, at 7:22 AM, Peter Hunsberger wrote:
On 12/4/06, Sylvain Wallez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Mark Lundquist wrote:
> Hi gang,
<snip/>
> So... WDYAT?
+1. Lots of good ideas!
I even think it may be implemented in a backwards compatible way, by
switching between the two approaches depending on the existence of a
"pattern" attribute, and thus go in a 2.2.x release.
Yes, if that is done then +1
The only thing that troubles me about that approach is the unintended
consequence... if a user is trying to use a "classic" matcher and they
bungle the 'pattern' attribute, the resulting error message will be
confusing because it will be coming from the "new style" matcher (or
its node builder). It'd be nice to figure out a graceful solution for
this case... but if not, then I guess "oh, well" :-)
—ml—
