X-Git-Url: http://git.vanrenterghem.biz/git.ikiwiki.info.git/blobdiff_plain/2af8a8d1fee73b54fcf28b1ef894010cc169be3e..3a04e96389def78bcb873a4487b85f4d75653199:/doc/todo/pagespec_expansions.mdwn diff --git a/doc/todo/pagespec_expansions.mdwn b/doc/todo/pagespec_expansions.mdwn index e3302995a..6107f5489 100644 --- a/doc/todo/pagespec_expansions.mdwn +++ b/doc/todo/pagespec_expansions.mdwn @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ A couple of suggestions for improving the usefulness of pagespecs: I've looked at how to implement "./", yes, and I was a little hesitant to disturb the elegant implementation of pagespecs as it is now. That's -why I wrote this todo item rather than just a patch :). As I see it, +why I wrote this todo item rather than just a patch. :) As I see it, the simplest thing to do is check globs when building the pagespec expression and translate "./foo" to "$from.'/foo'" in the resulting expression, and then add the $from paramater to pagespec_match. This does @@ -38,4 +38,114 @@ physical shape to "*" but enclosed, suggesting limitations. I also thought it would be useful in simplifying hacks like in [[plugins/map]] but I see now that I was mistaken.. "four or fewer levels deep" would be "@ or @/@ or @/@/@ or @/@/@/@". Well, I think it has a certain appeal but -I can see why it might not be much of an improvement :). --Ethan \ No newline at end of file +I can see why it might not be much of an improvement. :) --Ethan + +> Seems to me that ".." would be the natural thing to use, not "@". --[[Joey]] + +>> I don't understand.. "a/b/.." matches a/b/c but not a/b/c/d ? That doesn't +>> seem natural to me at all. --Ethan + +>>> Ah.. in that case, why not use "a/b/* and !a/b/*/*" ? No need for a new +>>> symbol. --[[Joey]] + +>>>> I know it's not necessary, but it would be helpful. --Ethan + +>>>>> I don't see the need for a new syntax since it's only a little long +>>>>> using the old one. And of course even that can now be shortened: +>>>>> "./* and !./*/*" --[[Joey]] + +OK, I took a shot at implementing the changes. I was thinking about making +pagespecs relative by default but I couldn't decide whether page +`foo/bar` inlining `*` should match `foo/bar/*` or `foo/*`. +So I punted and left things as absolute, with `./*` matching +`foo/bar/*`, which I think is pretty clear. +The patch is at [ikidev](http://ikidev.betacantrips.com/patches/pagespec_enhancements.patch) +and you can see it work at +[this page](http://ikidev.betacantrips.com/one/two/three/index.html) or +[this page](http://ikidev.betacantrips.com/one/two/three/princess.html) --Ethan + +> Nice patch, though I see the following problems with it: +> * The sole pagespec_match in IkiWiki::Render probably should have `$p` +> as its third parameter. This will allow add_depends to add a +> dependency on a pagespec that matches relative to the page. I made this +> changes and it seems to work, new pages are noticed in updates. + +>> OK, word. + +> * `! $from` fails to match pages named "0" :-) + +>> I don't understand. How did you even get $from into the +>> translated pagespec? + +> * '/./ matches any letter, not just "." :-) :-) + +>> Oof, thanks for catching that. + +> * One other major problem. If you look at the doc/examples/blog/index.mdwn +> I changed it to use relative globs like "./posts/*", but they didn't work, +> because it looked for examples/blog/indexposts/* instead of +> examples/blog/index/posts/*. And, of course, what I really expected it to +> look for was examples/blog/posts/*. I think you may have made the wrong +> choice about that, so I changed it to go the other way. What do you think? + +>> I could have sworn I made a change like that -- I was gonna make a call to +>> basename() or something .. wait, I might have decided not to, because it +>> would interfere with my index patch. Yeah, I guess my code was wrong. +>> Don't "nice patches" usually work? :) My test cases were mostly "./*", +>> so it slipped under the radar. + +>> As for what it should have done, that's much harder! My gut feeling is that +>> "a/b/c.mdwn" inlining `./*` wants `a/b/c/*` and not `a/b/*`, and this is +>> what I programmed for. I also feel that "a/b/c" inlining `./d/*` could go +>> either way. Ideally we'd check for both, maybe using bestlink? + +>> The issue might be confounded some by your use of an index page, and +>> ikiwiki doesn't have good support for those yet :) . +>> I think ideally your index page would be treated as inlining from +>> examples/blog/. To resolve this issue we should consider, for example: +>> clothes/pants inlines `./jeans/*` -- probably means clothes/pants/jeans +>> vacation/bermuda/blog inlines `./pics/*` -- probably vacation/bermuda/pics + +>>> What strikes me about your examples is that the "right thing" is +>>> utterly contect dependent. Unfortunatly, I don't think that using +>>> bestlink inside pagespec is possible. bestlinks change as pages are +>>> added/removed, and dealing with the matches of a pagespec changing when +>>> some page that is added or removed seems Hard. +>>> +>>> Since it seems we have to arbitrarily pick one of the two behaviors, I +>>> prefer the one I picked for two reasons: +>>> 1. The other behavior can be obtained easily from it, for example, +>>> use ./c/* to limit the matches to that subdir. +>>> 2. The common case is a bunch of pages in a single directory, not lots +>>> of deeply nested subdirs. +>>> --[[Joey]] + +>>>> Context-dependence was my conclusion too. My feeling is that inlining +>>>> in a subdirectory of the current page is more common, but I don't +>>>> really know. However, I think the changes as written should work OK +>>>> with my index patch and allowing inlining from a/b/c/, so I'm +>>>> satisfied. --Ethan + +> I've committed support for ./ to ikiwiki now, based on your patch. +> [[todo/done]] +> --[[Joey]] + +>> Cool! I haven't played with it yet, but looking over the patch, I see that +>> you added another parameter to match_glob, which is an approach that didn't +>> occur to me. I like it, it's more flexible. --Ethan + +One last thing -- could you either change: + + $from=~s!/?[^/]+$!!; + +to + + $from=~s!/?[^/]*$!!; + +Or could you put in: + + $glob =~ s!//!/!g; + +somewhere? Or should I just add this to my index patch? --Ethan + +> If it's specific to your index patch, let's put it in there. --[[Joey]]