summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorhttps://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawlnFkgzrv6n4UuYWXv8APZiG8_ydyMOyR4 <Timo@web>2011-04-30 19:22:27 -0400
committerJoey Hess <joey@kitenet.net>2011-04-30 19:22:27 -0400
commit4e635d4d5e5ed6d685c2e8fdf6af24cd3e5571c5 (patch)
tree1cca85942abe16d5637d1297df798fd55a909974 /doc
parent1ea8f4cf4d9483f11eff019db8cd1bd287088ab6 (diff)
patch has been fixed, links, too, as well as the example.
Diffstat (limited to 'doc')
-rw-r--r--doc/todo/nested_preprocessor_directives.mdwn17
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