diff options
| author | https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawlnFkgzrv6n4UuYWXv8APZiG8_ydyMOyR4 <Timo@web> | 2011-04-30 19:22:27 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Joey Hess <joey@kitenet.net> | 2011-04-30 19:22:27 -0400 |
| commit | 4e635d4d5e5ed6d685c2e8fdf6af24cd3e5571c5 (patch) | |
| tree | 1cca85942abe16d5637d1297df798fd55a909974 /doc | |
| parent | 1ea8f4cf4d9483f11eff019db8cd1bd287088ab6 (diff) | |
patch has been fixed, links, too, as well as the example.
Diffstat (limited to 'doc')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/todo/nested_preprocessor_directives.mdwn | 17 |
1 files changed, 12 insertions, 5 deletions
diff --git a/doc/todo/nested_preprocessor_directives.mdwn b/doc/todo/nested_preprocessor_directives.mdwn index 079981054..997d61278 100644 --- a/doc/todo/nested_preprocessor_directives.mdwn +++ b/doc/todo/nested_preprocessor_directives.mdwn @@ -22,11 +22,12 @@ nesting, a new syntax would be needed. Maybe something xml-like? >> parser though. >> >> In the meantime, this is an interesting approach: ->> <https://github.com/timo/ikiwiki/commit/a73837a8f26147e42a0bb2dde38b4890b27822b3> +>> <https://github.com/timo/ikiwiki/commit/dc90611e8305937ddaf7dd77341052337111242b> +>> (the link has since been fixed) >> ->> \[[!directive text=\<\<FOO ->> ... ->> FOO]] +>> \[[!directive text=<<FOO +>> ... +>> FOO]] >> >> Since that's implemented, I will probably just merge it, >> once I satisfy myself it doesn't blow up in any edge cases. @@ -51,8 +52,14 @@ nesting, a new syntax would be needed. Maybe something xml-like? >> I apparently missed copying it over as well. Should have been doing this >> in a git repo all along. Look at the new commit I put atop it that has >> the rest as well: ->> <https://github.com/timo/ikiwiki/commit/a4e33d9654404acff71344cd5d3672bcdf3f3ce5> +>> (redacted: is now part of the commit linked to from above) >> Also: I'm not sure any more, why I added the m modifier. It was very >> late at night and I was getting a bit desperate (turned out, the next >> morning, I put my extra regexes after the "unquoted value" one. heh.) >> So, feel free to fix that. --Timo +>> +>> I've fixed the patch by rebasing, fixed the link above. I'm still not +>> sure if the m modifier for the regex is still needed (apparently I +>> didn't put it in the other regexes. Not completely sure about the +>> implications.) Am now trying to wrap my head around a test case to +>> test the new formats for a bit. --Timo |