Gunnar Hjalmarsson wrote:
However, I feel that the fix is infirm, and I'm inclined to think
that the format of the template variables should be changed. I'm
considering a change from [VARIABLE] to %VARIABLE%.
James:
Are there any known side effects of such a change?
A few people may need to redo previous customization. Besides that,
I'm not aware of any side effects.
Pete:
I haven't a clue what you mean by 'infirm',
I mean that the fix does not reliably enough distinguish the variables
from other things that may be included on a customized template.
but they do mention "greediness"??
Well, that is... quite another thing. If you are about to start
programming, you'd better learn what it is, but otherwise I don't
think you want to know it. :)
Jeff:
%VARIABLE% sounds fine to me. I can't guarantee you won't run into
another issue just like this down the road though. The unknown is
always bothersome.
I didn't expect any guarantees... To be honest, I'm disappointed at
myself, since JavaScript isn't exactly an unknown language in
connection with web programming.
It should be easy enough to write a small shell script to convert
[VARIABLE] to %VARIABLE% in existing templates. It could be
included in the ringlink distro when the change is made.
In that case a CGI script. But I won't do that. Assuming that only a
few persons have done any customization so far, the few minutes they
might save through such a script wouldn't justify the time it would
take to write and test it.
/ Gunnar