X-Git-Url: http://git.vanrenterghem.biz/git.ikiwiki.info.git/blobdiff_plain/2e1fa14a737312d852fd33d7c8518da01695c7da..18f35269c26dd23e1c91c5e930ed5d62526b558f:/doc/bugs/conditional_preprocess_during_scan.mdwn?ds=inline

diff --git a/doc/bugs/conditional_preprocess_during_scan.mdwn b/doc/bugs/conditional_preprocess_during_scan.mdwn
index baa430e19..23b9fd2cc 100644
--- a/doc/bugs/conditional_preprocess_during_scan.mdwn
+++ b/doc/bugs/conditional_preprocess_during_scan.mdwn
@@ -17,3 +17,41 @@ reprocessed is done so in the same conditions as the original call.
 > been scanned yet). If you have a clever idea for how to fix this, I'd love
 > to hear it - being able to specify a [[plugins/contrib/trail]] in terms
 > of a sorted pagespec would be useful. --[[smcv]]
+
+>> I have a solution to the dependency-ordering problem in a different
+>> branch of my repository, with a post_scan hook mechanism which I use to
+>> be able to sort outer inline pages according to the last modification
+>> date of their nested inline pages. The way I implemented it currently,
+>> though, doesn't use the existing hooks mechanism of ikiwiki (because
+>> it's something which I believe to be more efficiently done the way I
+>> implemented it) so I don't know how likely it is to be included
+>> upstream.
+
+>> For what it's worth, I think that my post_scan hook mechanism would work
+>> rather fine with your trail plugin.
+
+>>> We discussed this on IRC, and I think it's actually more complicated
+>>> than that: the branch to sort by newest inlined entry wants a
+>>> "pagespecs now work" hook, whereas for trail I want a "sorting now
+>>> works" hook:
+>>>
+>>> * scan
+>>> * pagespecs now work (post-scan)
+>>>   * Giuseppe's version of inline can decide what each inline
+>>>     contains, and thus decide where they go in `inline(mtime)`
+>>>     order
+>>> * pagespecs and sorting now work (pre-render)
+>>>   * my trail plugin can decide what each trail contains, and
+>>>     also sort them in the right order (which might be
+>>>     `inline(mtime)`, so might be undefined until pagespecs work)
+>>> * render
+>>>
+>>> --[[smcv]]
+
+>> However, the case of the if
+>> directive is considerably more complicated, because the conditional
+>> can introduce a much stronger feedback effect in the pre/post scanning
+>> dependency. In fact, it's probably possible to build a couple of pages
+>> with vicious conditional dependency circles that would break/unbreak
+>> depending on which pass we are in. And I believe this is an intrinsic
+>> limitation of the system, which cannot be solved at all.