From 37a0eb353ea56d5e53cbe191e86844b17bf4c5ce Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Giuseppe Bilotta Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 23:08:26 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Reply to smcv about dependency ordering, post-scan hooks and conditionals --- .../conditional_preprocess_during_scan.mdwn | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+) diff --git a/doc/bugs/conditional_preprocess_during_scan.mdwn b/doc/bugs/conditional_preprocess_during_scan.mdwn index baa430e19..254ebac22 100644 --- a/doc/bugs/conditional_preprocess_during_scan.mdwn +++ b/doc/bugs/conditional_preprocess_during_scan.mdwn @@ -17,3 +17,21 @@ 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. 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. -- 2.39.2