Maybe the name is not the more intuitive, but the Javascript code is clear : [all[current]] doesn't iterate each tiddler (as all[missing] or all[orphans] do), it simply returns the currentTiddler variable if it exists, and an empty list if it doesn't. While [is[current]] without any selector implicitely iterates over all[tiddlers] (and so, the selection of tiddlers will become empty if the currentTiddler happens to be a pure shadow tiddler). I think is[current] only remains for backward compatibility, I've never seen it used where all[current] wouldn't do the job.
But <currentTiddler> is clear, and can be used instead of all[current] with similar performances (maybe only a difference if there is no tiddler in the currentTiddler variable, but I don't think so), so pick the one you prefer :) Le mardi 27 juin 2017 19:23:14 UTC+2, Danielo Rodríguez a écrit : > > To be honest, for me the current API is quite confusing. > > all[current] seems odd to me. Makes me think I am going to iterate all > the tiddlers just to get the current one. Which is more or less what I > though is[current] does. > In the documentation we should make clearer that is[current] to select the > current tiddler is discouraged. > > Regards > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/3f7b8efc-6c06-4e86-97cb-ace8682d4142%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
