Comment from the sidelines [Fwd: TCL tags]

[Paul Wagner <pa...@csgsystems.com>]

With mod_dtcl at its current 0.8 level isn't it close enough to "day 1"
for fundamental conventions to be switched if it makes sense?

As additional examples of the issue at hand, AOLserver (entirely
Tcl-based) uses both <% ... %> and <script language=tcl
...>...</script>. Scriptics'/Ajuba's TclHttpd grabs everything between
matched [ .. ] (greedy regexp) and sends it to Tcl for
evaluation/substitution, avoiding completely any form of <? .. ?>
wrapping.

Perhaps this notion of picking a different symbol for < .. > helps in an
environment where multiple languages and/or dynamic script processors
within a single document are supported (is there such a place?), but
generally it seems to be an indication of the language, and <?lang ...
?> is less obscure and possibly more portable.

Consistency (and deference to XML) surely is in the best interest of
everyone, agreed?

--Paul

Re: Tcl tags, still off line

["David N. Welton" <da...@apache.org>]

Wojciech Kocjan <zo...@nowiny.net> writes:

> > Yes, if it's a good thing, I'm willing to break backwards
> > compatiblity.  Keep in mind that some people have been using
> > mod_dtcl for a while though.  Posting a simple script that seeks
> > and changes .ttml files from <+ +> to <?dtcl ?> would probably be
> > appreciated if we do make this change.

> Why not using both <+ and <?dtcl ? This will be backwards compatible
> ...  

Because it will make the parser even uglier, and a bit slower.  I'm
going to play around with this some and see exactly how much.

I suspect I'll try and do it with ifdef's, so that people can turn it
off if/when they have transferred to the new system.

One idea I have is to use <? ?> and have the parser ignore the text up
to the first white space after the first <?, so that you can put
<?dtcl if it makes you feel better about identifying the script.  I
hate typing a lot of stuff in when I just want to print out a variable
though...  How do people feel about this?  The problem would be when
someone put <?hputs "foo"?> and their script didn't run...

> Then use <?dtcl ... and <SCRIPT LANGUAGE="dtcl"> - it may seem a bit weird
> as the language actually is tcl, but the 'dialect' is dtcl...

<script language....> is really ugly:-) And a pain in the ass to parse
if you don't match it exactly.

-- 
David N. Welton
     Personal:           http://www.efn.org/~davidw/  
Free Software:           http://people.debian.org/~davidw/
   Apache Tcl:           http://tcl.apache.org

Re: Tcl tags, still off line

[Wojciech Kocjan <zo...@nowiny.net>]

On 16 Jan 2001, David N. Welton wrote:
> [ Does this mean I'm back on line?  No, unfortunately.  The company
> that was supposed to be opening an office here in Padova has been slow
> about it.  I'm writing from a friends house, but hope to be back on
> line soonest.  If anyone wants to sponsor my work on mod_dtcl, offers
> are welcome: +39.348.8866859 :-) ]

We hope you'll be online soon too - I suppose ;-)

> > With mod_dtcl at its current 0.8 level isn't it close enough to "day
> > 1" for fundamental conventions to be switched if it makes sense?
> 
> Yes, if it's a good thing, I'm willing to break backwards
> compatiblity.  Keep in mind that some people have been using mod_dtcl
> for a while though.  Posting a simple script that seeks and changes
> .ttml files from <+ +> to <?dtcl ?> would probably be appreciated if
> we do make this change.

Why not using both <+ and <?dtcl ? This will be backwards compatible ...
I don't plan on jumping through all the servers I installed dtcl on ...
Besides it's always better to leave this on, at least for some time.

> > Consistency (and deference to XML) surely is in the best interest of
> > everyone, agreed?
> 
> I don't want to use 'tcl' though... I don't think it's quite fair to
> grab that whole name for mod_dtcl.  Otherwise, what might other
> parsers use?

Then use <?dtcl ... and <SCRIPT LANGUAGE="dtcl"> - it may seem a bit weird
as the language actually is tcl, but the 'dialect' is dtcl...

Wojciech Kocjan
wojciech@kocjan.org

Tcl tags, still off line

["David N. Welton" <da...@prosa.it>]

"Paul Wagner" <pa...@csgsystems.com> writes:

[ Does this mean I'm back on line?  No, unfortunately.  The company
that was supposed to be opening an office here in Padova has been slow
about it.  I'm writing from a friends house, but hope to be back on
line soonest.  If anyone wants to sponsor my work on mod_dtcl, offers
are welcome: +39.348.8866859 :-) ]

> With mod_dtcl at its current 0.8 level isn't it close enough to "day
> 1" for fundamental conventions to be switched if it makes sense?

Yes, if it's a good thing, I'm willing to break backwards
compatiblity.  Keep in mind that some people have been using mod_dtcl
for a while though.  Posting a simple script that seeks and changes
.ttml files from <+ +> to <?dtcl ?> would probably be appreciated if
we do make this change.

> As additional examples of the issue at hand, AOLserver (entirely
> Tcl-based) uses both <% ... %> and <script language=tcl
> ...>...</script>. Scriptics'/Ajuba's TclHttpd grabs everything
> between matched [ .. ] (greedy regexp) and sends it to Tcl for
> evaluation/substitution, avoiding completely any form of <? .. ?>
> wrapping.

> Perhaps this notion of picking a different symbol for < .. > helps
> in an environment where multiple languages and/or dynamic script
> processors within a single document are supported (is there such a
> place?), but generally it seems to be an indication of the language,
> and <?lang ...  ?> is less obscure and possibly more portable.
 
When I created mod_dtcl, there were a proliferation of <X tags, so I
just picked one at random.  I've never been particularly attached to
it, but I do like it to be short for those places where you just want
to insert a bit of text into a URL or something:

Your favorite color is <+ hputs $color +>

> Consistency (and deference to XML) surely is in the best interest of
> everyone, agreed?

I don't want to use 'tcl' though... I don't think it's quite fair to
grab that whole name for mod_dtcl.  Otherwise, what might other
parsers use?

-- 
David N. Welton
     Personal:           http://www.efn.org/~davidw/  
Free Software:           http://people.debian.org/~davidw/
   Apache Tcl:           http://tcl.apache.org