I owe John: 1 proselytizing message on OOP.
Here is your cup of coffee. Brewed from the finest Colombian lighter fluid.
Xander ,'Chosen'
Buffistas Building a Better Board
Do you have problems, concerns or recommendations about the technical side of the Phoenix? Air them here. Compliments also welcome.
Rob - Nov 27, 2002 10:53:37 pm PST #1747 of 10000
Noumenon - Nov 28, 2002 12:10:36 am PST #1748 of 10000
No other candidate is asking the hard questions, like "Did geophysicists assassinate Jim Henson?" or "Why is there hydrogen in America's water supply?" --defective yeti
Did you just give him an OOP FYI I.O.U.?
Jon B. - Nov 28, 2002 2:03:08 am PST #1749 of 10000
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
OK have a look at this page: [link]
Which tags is this supposed to check? Because it's not closing a t table tags.
John H - Nov 28, 2002 2:07:45 am PST #1750 of 10000
it's not closing a table tags.
It is now.
You tell me what tags, I'll add them -- does it actually make sense to tell it to close TABLE, TR and TDs?
Jon B. - Nov 28, 2002 2:17:40 am PST #1751 of 10000
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
You tell me what tags, I'll add them
Since I'm 3000 miles from home, I can't check the code and give you the list, but didn't I post a list upthread somewhere?
Ahh! I found it:
<a> <b> <i> <u> <ul> <ol> <li> <p> <br> <strike> <table> <tr> <td> <th> <font> <pre> <code>
does it actually make sense to tell it to close TABLE, TR and TDs?
Yes, but tables are tricky. As I pointed out a while back, the mere existence of a t td t /td pair within a post, without a t table t /table pair around them, causes havoc with the tables on this page. So even if you close an open t td tag, we'll still have problems.
I still think we should disallow table tags altogether (sorry, ita).
John H - Nov 28, 2002 2:23:47 am PST #1752 of 10000
didn't I post a list upthread somewhere?
The list I'm using is exactly that, with the table tags taken out.
The only way to reliably check table code would be with a proper parser, that checked syntax, not a brute-force method like mine.
John H - Nov 28, 2002 2:34:21 am PST #1753 of 10000
Thinking about my function, why would it need to return an error.
There are only two kinds of strings in the world. Those with unclosed HTML tags and those without. The string "" is a member of the second group.
So the array returned by it should just be ([true|false], content), right? The empty post thing would be handled elsewhere already.
Rob - Nov 28, 2002 7:22:57 am PST #1754 of 10000
I still think we should disallow table tags altogether (sorry, ita).
I think we should ignore the problem until we see it happening once a week. When it starts happening that frequently, we should make the board either fix or reject such posts.
Thinking about my function, why would it need to return an error.
Right now, maybe not, but perhaps it will need to in the future. How about we change the boolean to an integer, where zero is success without change, 1 means success and the message was changes, and anything negative is an error?
§ ita § - Nov 28, 2002 8:55:29 am PST #1755 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I admit I've been skimming the gory code details, because I've been so excited that I could.
What's the overhead involved in opening unmatched closes as well as closing unmatched opens? It's symmetrical, it's the full problem, and it means that the table thing's not a problem.
Very easy for me to say, what with someone else writing the code.
Theodosia - Nov 28, 2002 12:49:17 pm PST #1756 of 10000
'we all walk this earth feeling we are frauds. The trick is to be grateful and hope the caper doesn't end any time soon"
Did t strike just get knocked out? I had a "strike" tag in my last message in Sunnydale Press and when I went back to check on it, the strike doesn't work -- though when I went into Edit mode, the formatted tags were still there.