You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to rivet-dev@tcl.apache.org by Taneli Saastamoinen <ts...@cs.helsinki.fi> on 2004/02/21 19:20:01 UTC
.rvt:
All right, I managed to work around the Apache-segfaulting stat64
problem. I just wasn't able to recompile a working Apache with the
stat64 option David hinted at, so I took another machine, installed
Debian stable on it (with some components from testing), and everything
worked just right.
Now that I'm able to use the parse command, I noticed something else
interesting. IIRC the recommended way to start an XHTML page is:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-15"?>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.1//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml11/DTD/xhtml11.dtd">
Now, the problem is that when I try to create a .rvt page that starts
like this, Rivet of course interprets the <? and things don't work...
With a .tcl script I can just puts the thing, but .rvt files are parsed
in a way that seems to prevents this:
<?
puts {<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-15"?>}
?>
Rivet seems to intercept the ?>, resulting in the following:
missing close-brace
while compiling
"namespace eval request {
puts -nonewline ""
puts {<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-15"
puts -nonewline "\}
?>
"
}
I got things to work using the following:
puts "\<\?xml version=\"1.0\" encoding=\"ISO-8859-15\"\?\>"
So I'm not sure if this is a bug. However, I asked Setok about it and he
said I should report it. :) Perhaps Rivet should try to detect whether
?>'s are inside {}'s, and not interpret them if they are?
--
DOS: Da Oikea käyttiS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
Re: .rvt:
Posted by "David N. Welton" <da...@dedasys.com>.
Karl Lehenbauer <ka...@sc.com> writes:
> On Feb 25, 2004, at 6:59 AM, David N. Welton wrote:
> > "tcl" seems like a logical tag.
> > I added some code to the build scripts in order to make this
> > configurable via make.tcl. Maybe it should even go into the
> > configure script?
> So at the risk of looking stupid, does this mean that people can
> create Rivet sites that require Rivet to be specifically compiled to
> support the tag they chose to use?
Well - yes. I'm open to other ways of doing it though. Could be
configurable at run time, for instance.
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software: http://www.dedasys.com/freesoftware/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
Re: .rvt:
Posted by Karl Lehenbauer <ka...@sc.com>.
On Feb 25, 2004, at 6:59 AM, David N. Welton wrote:
> "tcl" seems like a logical tag.
>
> I added some code to the build scripts in order to make this
> configurable via make.tcl. Maybe it should even go into the configure
> script?
>
So at the risk of looking stupid, does this mean that people can create
Rivet sites that require Rivet to be specifically compiled to support
the tag they chose to use?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
Re: .rvt:
Posted by "David N. Welton" <da...@dedasys.com>.
Damon Courtney <da...@your.unreality.com> writes:
> > Damon Courtney <da...@your.unreality.com> writes:
> > > I think we're probably gonna' keep running into this. I don't
> > > know though. PHP gets along just fine without having to do anything
> > > fancy. Any clue how they do it?
> > It's a configuration option so that you can use <?php or just <? if
> > you want. Maybe that's the way to go...
> Sounds good to me. I would make it a compile option that can be
> specified for the make script. Should we let them put anything they
> want, or should we be specific about what is allowed (IE: <?rvt or
> <?tcl)?
> If I had to pick, I'd probably choose <?tcl ?>. 0-]
"tcl" seems like a logical tag.
I added some code to the build scripts in order to make this
configurable via make.tcl. Maybe it should even go into the configure
script?
Have a look at it...
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software: http://www.dedasys.com/freesoftware/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
Re: .rvt:
Posted by Damon Courtney <da...@your.unreality.com>.
> Damon Courtney <da...@your.unreality.com> writes:
>
> > I think we're probably gonna' keep running into this. I don't
> > know though. PHP gets along just fine without having to do anything
> > fancy. Any clue how they do it?
>
> It's a configuration option so that you can use <?php or just <? if
> you want. Maybe that's the way to go...
Sounds good to me. I would make it a compile option that can
be specified for the make script. Should we let them put anything
they want, or should we be specific about what is allowed (IE:
<?rvt or <?tcl)?
If I had to pick, I'd probably choose <?tcl ?>. 0-]
D
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
Re: .rvt:
Posted by "David N. Welton" <da...@dedasys.com>.
Damon Courtney <da...@your.unreality.com> writes:
> I think we're probably gonna' keep running into this. I don't
> know though. PHP gets along just fine without having to do anything
> fancy. Any clue how they do it?
It's a configuration option so that you can use <?php or just <? if
you want. Maybe that's the way to go...
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software: http://www.dedasys.com/freesoftware/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
Re: .rvt:
Posted by Damon Courtney <da...@your.unreality.com>.
> to something like
>
> <?tcl
>
> <?rvt
>
> or something along those lines...
>
> I suppose this could also be made into a configurable option, as
> well...
>
> What do others think?
I think we're probably gonna' keep running into this.
I don't know though. PHP gets along just fine without having
to do anything fancy. Any clue how they do it?
D
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org
Re: .rvt:
Posted by "David N. Welton" <da...@dedasys.com>.
Taneli Saastamoinen <ts...@cs.helsinki.fi> writes:
> So I'm not sure if this is a bug. However, I asked Setok about it
> and he said I should report it. :) Perhaps Rivet should try to
> detect whether ?>'s are inside {}'s, and not interpret them if they
> are?
Hrm, I'll think about it, although it starts making the parser more
complicated.
Another thing you could do is change these in rivetParser.h:
#define STARTING_SEQUENCE "<?"
#define ENDING_SEQUENCE "?>"
to something like
<?tcl
<?rvt
or something along those lines...
I suppose this could also be made into a configurable option, as
well...
What do others think?
--
David N. Welton
Consulting: http://www.dedasys.com/
Personal: http://www.dedasys.com/davidw/
Free Software: http://www.dedasys.com/freesoftware/
Apache Tcl: http://tcl.apache.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: rivet-dev-unsubscribe@tcl.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: rivet-dev-help@tcl.apache.org