--- Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?
> I'm slightly concerned that this might be a bit cryptic and
> may cause
> problems on the offchance that someone really does have a '+'
> or '-'
> at the end of their path. Other suggestions welcome.
Comment: avoid cryptic anything!!
Suggestion: add optional elements which can be
used for these situations.
INCLUDE_PATH_UP (checks everything below it)
INCLUDE_PATH_DOWN (checks everything above it, to ???)
Question:
You example assumed there were no subdir branches.
what if you are looking for 'foobar' here?
/a/b/c/foobar
/a/b/d/e/foobar
How do you search down, in what order?
How do you find the bottom, so you can search up, and
in what order?
--
doug edmunds
(apologies in advance if this doesn't appear
as I hoped it would).
--- Andy Wardley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2001 at 08:56:54AM -0500, darren chamberlain
> wrote:
> > > Doesn't Apache::Template do this too?
> >
> > I submitted a patch a few weeks (months?) back that added
> that
> > fucntionality.
>
> Yes, sorry, I think I'm sitting on it.
>
> I like the idea of being able to search up and down the
> INCLUDE_PATH in
> various different ways. In fact, I like it so much, I want to
> try and
> fit it into the TT core (e.g. Template::Provider). That way,
> we all
> get to use it and it becomes available for free in
> Apache::Template.
>
> I've been reading over Chuck's email, and also Darren's email
> from back
> in June when he first raised this issue (sorry it's taken so
> long for
> me to get around to it).
>
> Darren said:
>
> * For historical reasons, our HTML developers require that
> files that are INCLUDEd or PROCESSed be searched for in a
> tree-walking manner, starting with the directory of
> $r->filename and ascending to /. This has the effect of
> including the closest copy of files declared in
> TT2PreProcess
> and TT2PostProcess, which works out very well for using a
> single set of header and footer files for an entire site,
> while having section specific navigation bars and features
> that get included without having to specify paths and the
> like.
>
> Chuck said:
>
> * In order to do this, each template remembers where it was
> loaded from, and sets its working directory to that
> directory.
> Templates loaded without any leading path qualifiers,
> which
> normally causes INCLUDE_PATH to be searched in TT2 are
> searched
> for as if INCLUDE_PATH were the current directory and
> every
> directory above it (up to an APP_ROOT config setting that
> is.
> Also, templates loaded with an absolute path are treated
> as
> relative to APP_ROOT, making the whole tree relocatable.
>
> I was thinking about allowing certain modifier metacharacters
> on the
> end of an INCLUDE_PATH element which activate this kind of
> behaviour.
> For example,
>
> INCLUDE_PATH = /foo:/bar+
>
> If the main template is 'abc/def/ghi.tt2' which gets resolved
> as
> '/foo/abc/def/ghi.tt2' and includes a directive like [%
> INCLUDE xyz %]
> then it should look for:
>
> /foo/xyz
> /bar/xyz
> /bar/abc/xyz
> /bar/abc/def/xyz
>
> In other words, the '+' indicates that the provider should
> walk down
> from /bar adding elements of the main template's path until a
> match
> is found.
>
> To walk up the path, you would use '-'. So for the same,
> example as
> above, the INCLUDE_PATH
>
> INCLUDE_PATH = /foo:/bar-
>
> would try to find
>
> /foo/xyz
> /bar/abc/def/xyz
> /bar/abc/xyz
> /bar/xyz
>
> Note that in both cases, the provider doesn't ever search
> above the
> root of the INCLUDE_PATH element (e.g. /foo or /bar). I think
> it's
> important that we keep it that way and limit such use to the
> ABSOLUTE
> and RELATIVE options.
>
> I'm slightly concerned that this might be a bit cryptic and
> may cause
> problems on the offchance that someone really does have a '+'
> or '-'
> at the end of their path. Other suggestions welcome.
>
> Another thought is that it would be nice for the
> provider/document to
> be able to find all possible matches so that we can introduce
> the
> concept of pseudo-inheritance between template components.
> Currently,
> [% component %] always gives the Template::Document for the
> current
> template component, and so [% component.super %] (or something
> like that)
> could be the next template that would have matched after this
> one
> (e.g. the template of the same name one of the parent
> directories).
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Suggestions?
>
>
> A
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> templates mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.template-toolkit.org/mailman/listinfo/templates
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
http://personals.yahoo.com
