diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies.mdwn')
| -rw-r--r-- | doc/todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies.mdwn | 42 |
1 files changed, 41 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/doc/todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies.mdwn b/doc/todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies.mdwn index 2832e37aa..8b36f1e59 100644 --- a/doc/todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies.mdwn +++ b/doc/todo/tracking_bugs_with_dependencies.mdwn @@ -11,6 +11,8 @@ I like the idea of [[tips/integrated_issue_tracking_with_ikiwiki]], and I do so > >> I thought about this briefly, and got about that far.. glad you got >> further. :-) --[[Joey]] + +>> Or, one [[!taglink could_also_refer|pagespec_in_DL_style]] to the language of [[!wikipedia description logics]]: their formulas actually define classes of objects through quantified relations to other classes. --Ivan Z. > > Another option would be go with a more functional syntax. The concept here would > be to allow a pagespec to appear in a 'pagespec function' anywhere a page can. e.g. @@ -58,6 +60,7 @@ I like the idea of [[tips/integrated_issue_tracking_with_ikiwiki]], and I do so >> So, equivilant example: `define(bugs, bugs/* and !*/Discussion) and define(openbugs, bugs and !link(done)) and openbugs and !link(openbugs)` >> + >> Re recursion, it is avoided.. but building a pagespec that is O(N^X) where N is the >> number of pages in the wiki is not avoided. Probably need to add DOS prevention. >> --[[Joey]] @@ -67,13 +70,15 @@ I like the idea of [[tips/integrated_issue_tracking_with_ikiwiki]], and I do so >>>> Yeah, guess that'd work. :-) -> One quick further thought. All the above discussion assumes that 'dependency' is the +> <a id="another_kind_of_links" />One quick further thought. All the above discussion assumes that 'dependency' is the > same as 'links to', which is not really true. For example, you'd like to be able to say > "This bug does not depend upon [ [ link to other bug ] ]" and not have a dependency. > Without having different types of links, I don't see how this would be possible. > > -- [[Will]] +>> I saw that this issue is targeted at by the work on [[structured page data#another_kind_of_links]]. --Ivan Z. + Okie - I've had a quick attempt at this. Initial patch attached. This one doesn't quite work. And there is still a lot of debugging stuff in there. @@ -188,6 +193,41 @@ The following three inlines work for me with this patch: I've lost track of the indent level, so I'm going back to not indented - I think this is a working [[patch]] taking into account all comments above (which doesn't mean it is above reproach :) ). --[[Will]] +> Very belated code review of last version of the patch: +> +> * `is_globlist` is no longer needed +> * I don't understand why the pagespec match regexp is changed +> from having flags `igx` to `ixgs`. Don't see why you +> want `.` to match '\n` in it, and don't see any `.` in the regexp +> anyway? +> * Some changes of `@_` to `%params` in `pagespec_makeperl` do not +> make sense to me. I don't see where \%params is defined and populated, +> except with `\$params{specFunc}`. +> * Seems that the only reason `match_glob` has to check for `~` is +> because when a named spec appears in a pagespec, it is translated +> to `match_glob("~foo")`. If, instead, `pagespec_makeperl` checked +> for named specs, it could convert them into `check_named_spec("foo")` +> and avoid that ugliness. +> * The changes to `match_link` seem either unecessary, or incomplete. +> Shouldn't it check for named specs and call +> `check_named_spec_existential`? +> * Generally, the need to modify `match_*` functions so that they +> check for and handle named pagespecs seems suboptimal, if +> only because there might be others people may want to use named +> pagespecs with. It would be possible to move this check +> to `pagespec_makeperl`, by having it check if the parameter +> passed to a pagespec function looked like a named pagespec. +> The only issue is that some pagespec functions take a parameter +> that is not a page name at all, and it could be weird +> if such a parameter were accidentially interpreted as a named +> pagespec. (But, that seems unlikely to happen.) +> * I need to check if your trick to avoid infinite recursion +> works if there are two named specs that recursively +> call one-another. I suspect it does, but will test this +> myself.. +> +> --[[Joey]] + ---- diff --git a/IkiWiki.pm b/IkiWiki.pm |