You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Nick Gearls <ni...@gmail.com> on 2016/10/05 12:50:33 UTC
Re: mod_macro: Control on bad nesting
The proposed patch
(https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34012&action=diff) is
fully back-ward compatible and can save a lot of useless warnings in the
log.
Anyway to get somebody review it?
Thanks
On 06-07-2016 09:20, Nick Gearls wrote:
> There's a patch (see
> https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59660) containing both
> options (global directive + flag) for both warnings (nesting & empty
> arguments)
>
>> Good point.
>> A global option is not a good option as it would disable this very
>> useful check for all macros.
>>
>> What about "<Macro /NoNestingCheck param1 param2 ..."?
>>
>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:19:24 -0400, Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > What syntax would be the best one? maybe a (one character) /option
>> after the
>> > Macro keyword?
>> > Ex: "<Macro/n ...>" (and later "<Macro/ni ..." if we add another flag)
>> Kinda ugly and probably breaks the core from recognizing "<Macro".
>> Maybe a global directive to turn off the nesting check? Or a
>> convention for the macro name? Or a second tag like
>> <MacroNoNestingCheck> (bad name) that is a very thin wrapper around
>> existing stuff?
>
Re: mod_macro: Control on bad nesting
Posted by Nick Gearls <ni...@gmail.com>.
BOOL - fixed :-(
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: mod_macro: Control on bad nesting
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 09:54:43 -0400
From: Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>
To: dev@httpd.apache.org, nickgearls@gmail.com
'bool' ??
> On Oct 5, 2016, at 8:50 AM, Nick Gearls <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The proposed patch (https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34012&action=diff) is fully back-ward compatible and can save a lot of useless warnings in the log.
> Anyway to get somebody review it?
>
> Thanks
>
> On 06-07-2016 09:20, Nick Gearls wrote:
>> There's a patch (see https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59660) containing both options (global directive + flag) for both warnings (nesting & empty arguments)
>>
>>> Good point.
>>> A global option is not a good option as it would disable this very
>>> useful check for all macros.
>>>
>>> What about "<Macro /NoNestingCheck param1 param2 ..."?
>>>
>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:19:24 -0400, Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > What syntax would be the best one? maybe a (one character) /option after the
>>> > Macro keyword?
>>> > Ex: "<Macro/n ...>" (and later "<Macro/ni ..." if we add another flag)
>>> Kinda ugly and probably breaks the core from recognizing "<Macro".
>>> Maybe a global directive to turn off the nesting check? Or a
>>> convention for the macro name? Or a second tag like
>>> <MacroNoNestingCheck> (bad name) that is a very thin wrapper around
>>> existing stuff?
Re: mod_macro: Control on bad nesting
Posted by Jim Jagielski <ji...@jaguNET.com>.
'bool' ??
> On Oct 5, 2016, at 8:50 AM, Nick Gearls <ni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The proposed patch (https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=34012&action=diff) is fully back-ward compatible and can save a lot of useless warnings in the log.
> Anyway to get somebody review it?
>
> Thanks
>
> On 06-07-2016 09:20, Nick Gearls wrote:
>> There's a patch (see https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=59660) containing both options (global directive + flag) for both warnings (nesting & empty arguments)
>>
>>> Good point.
>>> A global option is not a good option as it would disable this very
>>> useful check for all macros.
>>>
>>> What about "<Macro /NoNestingCheck param1 param2 ..."?
>>>
>>> On Fri, 3 Jun 2016 10:19:24 -0400, Eric Covener <co...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > What syntax would be the best one? maybe a (one character) /option after the
>>> > Macro keyword?
>>> > Ex: "<Macro/n ...>" (and later "<Macro/ni ..." if we add another flag)
>>> Kinda ugly and probably breaks the core from recognizing "<Macro".
>>> Maybe a global directive to turn off the nesting check? Or a
>>> convention for the macro name? Or a second tag like
>>> <MacroNoNestingCheck> (bad name) that is a very thin wrapper around
>>> existing stuff?
>>
>