Damon Courtney wrote:
>>I'm thinking about redoing the parser to take into account situations
>>like this:
>>
>>----
>><some html>
>>
>><?
>>puts {<? blah blah blah?>}
>>?>
>>----
>>
>>Which currently cause problems with the parser. Thoughts? Maybe at
>>the same time, I can make it accept <?dtcl as well as <?, also...
> Hrmmm... Couldn't we just check to see if we're already in a block
> of code?
I suppose a counter would be the easiest way to do it - when started it
is 0, on evert "<?rivet" it is incremented by 1, on every "?>" it is
decremented if the counter is >0.
However, I suppose a problem would be with XML stuff like this:
<?rivet
puts "<?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"$encoding\"?>"
?>
The only way around this would be to:
1/ learn to write ?\> - which could be a PITA
2/ write the <? stack and trace which <? were connected with rivet and
which were not. In this case the stack would be {1 0} - which means that
the first <? started a script, however the second one didn't.
It will work with the above example. However, the following is a big
problem:
<?rivet
proc php_end {} {
puts "?>"
}
proc php_begin {} {
puts "<?php "
}
php_begin
puts "echo('test')"
php_end
?>
> I like the idea of specifying some kind of specific rivet tag,
> but I think doing <?rivet is a bad idea. I mean, I guess it works. NWS
> had its own tag which looked more like a real HTML tag. They were just:
>
> <nws>
> [...]
> Etc...
I don't like the idea of using tags - the same reason David mentioned.
--
WK
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
