[pmwiki-users] Re: Keep() function documented
chr at home.se
chr at home.se
Tue Jul 5 18:25:42 CDT 2005
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Patrick R. Michaud wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 11:34:01PM +0200, Joachim Durchholz wrote:
> > >There's nothing to "prevent" someone from doing it, but such
> > >nested keeps are generally not restored properly. That's what
> > >I meant by "not legally nestable" -- someone can write a script
> > >that does it, but they may not be entirely happy with the results.
> >
> > Ah, I see.
> >
> > Note that such nesting can easily happen if a markup calls PRR().
>
> Perhaps; more generally I'd suspect it's a misuse of Keep. In
> general, once a particular markup has been processed, its pattern
> no longer appears in the string for reprocessing.
<jumping in to a thread that I haven't followed *that* closely>
I have a vague memory of being bitten by nested Keep() when creating a
markup that was nested. The details are unclear, but I might have been
doing something like:
(:something (:other-thing:):)
where (:other-thing:) produced a URI or whatever that I'd protected using
Keep(), and (:something:) then applied Keep() to it again.
Hmm... guess you can think of this as a vote for allowing nested calls to
Keep() then.
</jumping ...>
/Christian
--
Christian Ridderström, +46-8-768 39 44 http://www.md.kth.se/~chr
More information about the pmwiki-users
mailing list