Re (tilly) 1: Brackets in the CB.

One of the reasons why I wrote Why I like functional programming was that I was hoping a version of that would be incorporated into the site. The rewrite Functional take 2 was for nate and was intended to solve some specific kinds of problems that the Everything engine faced. (Namely that people should only be using table tags inside of tables that they opened.)

I don't know whether either was incorporated in the Everything engine, but one of the things that showed up in that thread was the proposed handler:

sub {
  my $t_ref = shift;
  if ($$t_ref =~ /\G([&\[\]<>\\])/g) {
    return encode_entities($1);
  }
}
[download]

for \, which would allow you to forget all of the special escapes and just backslash any special characters you wanted.

I think that is a better answer to the problem that you propose, and I still want the feature. Perhaps some day I will be motivated enough to download the Everything engine and do it myself...

Comment on Re (tilly) 1: Brackets in the CB. Download Code

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re (tilly) 1: Brackets in the CB. by Chmrr (Vicar) on Jan 11, 2002 at 07:28 UTC
I'm certain that PM's parselinks htmlcode node is much more complicated than the stock Everything's, but methinks it's simply an issue of adding a line or two to the top of it. perl -pe '"I lo`+$^X$\"$]!$/"=~m%(.)%s;$_=$1;y^`+*^e v^#$&V"+@( NO CARRIER'	[reply]
Re (tilly) 3: Brackets in the CB. by tilly (Archbishop) on Jan 11, 2002 at 07:48 UTC
It is not so simple. The suggestion that I had is a replacement that is seen not just for brackets, but also to do things like replace "\&" with "&" so that you can choose to write "\&" and get "&" rather than "\&". And that involves the heart of how we parse, rather than just a link here and a couple of disallowed tags there.	[reply]