From slawek.zak at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 14:10:41 2009
From: slawek.zak at gmail.com (Slawek Zak)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 15:10:41 +0100
Subject: [cl-who-devel] Sharing indentation info
Message-ID: <787bbe1c0903040610k3d54d0a9jbd40b3cc0c39c39a@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

I'd like to propose a small patch to cl-who, which allows for *indent*
retention across function calls.

Regards, /S
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/cl-who-devel/attachments/20090304/0f7d1d00/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: who.lisp.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 633 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/cl-who-devel/attachments/20090304/0f7d1d00/attachment.bin>

From slawek.zak at gmail.com  Wed Mar  4 14:05:21 2009
From: slawek.zak at gmail.com (Slawek Zak)
Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 15:05:21 +0100
Subject: [cl-who-devel] Double sexp tree traversal
In-Reply-To: <787bbe1c0902261013o72164de5w87dc371369aea068@mail.gmail.com>
References: <787bbe1c0902261013o72164de5w87dc371369aea068@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <787bbe1c0903040605t232c1a8fv542ff07b08c11d8@mail.gmail.com>

Gah, it's macroexpanded twice! :)

/S

On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 7:13 PM, Slawek Zak <slawek.zak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Is it necessary to walk the tree two times in cl-who?
>
> CL-USER> (cl-who:with-html-output-to-string (*standard-output*)
>        (:one (:two)))
>  0[7]: (CL-WHO::TREE-TO-TEMPLATE ((:ONE (:TWO))))
>    1[7]: (CL-WHO::PROCESS-TAG (:ONE (:TWO))
>                               #<Function TREE-TO-TEMPLATE>)
>      2[7]: (CL-WHO::TREE-TO-TEMPLATE ((:TWO)))
>        3[7]: (CL-WHO::PROCESS-TAG (:TWO) #<Function TREE-TO-TEMPLATE>)
>        3[7]: returned ("<" "two" ">" "</" "two" ">")
>      2[7]: returned ("<" "two" ">" "</" "two" ">")
>    1[7]: returned
>            ("<" "one" ">" "<" "two" ">" "</" "two" ">" "</" "one" ">")
>  0[7]: returned
>          ("<" "one" ">" "<" "two" ">" "</" "two" ">" "</" "one" ">")
>  0[7]: (CL-WHO::TREE-TO-TEMPLATE ((:ONE (:TWO))))
>    1[7]: (CL-WHO::PROCESS-TAG (:ONE (:TWO))
>                               #<Function TREE-TO-TEMPLATE>)
>      2[7]: (CL-WHO::TREE-TO-TEMPLATE ((:TWO)))
>        3[7]: (CL-WHO::PROCESS-TAG (:TWO) #<Function TREE-TO-TEMPLATE>)
>        3[7]: returned ("<" "two" ">" "</" "two" ">")
>      2[7]: returned ("<" "two" ">" "</" "two" ">")
>    1[7]: returned
>            ("<" "one" ">" "<" "two" ">" "</" "two" ">" "</" "one" ">")
>  0[7]: returned
>          ("<" "one" ">" "<" "two" ">" "</" "two" ">" "</" "one" ">")
>
> I use version:
>
> $Header: /usr/local/cvsrep/cl-who/who.lisp,v 1.36 2008/03/27 23:17:55 edi
> Exp
>
> Thanks, /S
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.common-lisp.net/pipermail/cl-who-devel/attachments/20090304/0c56fc7b/attachment.html>

From edi at agharta.de  Thu Mar  5 20:16:05 2009
From: edi at agharta.de (Edi Weitz)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 21:16:05 +0100
Subject: [cl-who-devel] Sharing indentation info
In-Reply-To: <787bbe1c0903040610k3d54d0a9jbd40b3cc0c39c39a@mail.gmail.com>
References: <787bbe1c0903040610k3d54d0a9jbd40b3cc0c39c39a@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b56421a00903051216t731f5937vc8209df6489535ad@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 3:10 PM, Slawek Zak <slawek.zak at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd like to propose a small patch to cl-who, which allows for *indent*
> retention across function calls.

Thanks.  I have a new version of CL-WHO on my hard disk which has been
there for months and which I didn't have the time to finish and
release.  I'm going to send it to the bknr.net repository in the next
days.  Could you then please check if your patch still applies to this
new version?

Thank,s
Edi.



From edi at agharta.de  Thu Mar  5 20:14:05 2009
From: edi at agharta.de (Edi Weitz)
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 21:14:05 +0100
Subject: [cl-who-devel] Double sexp tree traversal
In-Reply-To: <787bbe1c0903040605t232c1a8fv542ff07b08c11d8@mail.gmail.com>
References: <787bbe1c0902261013o72164de5w87dc371369aea068@mail.gmail.com>
	<787bbe1c0903040605t232c1a8fv542ff07b08c11d8@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b56421a00903051214j6c7b63c4g4c4073b66d443555@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Slawek,

Sorry for the late reply.  I'm pretty busy, as usual.

2009/3/4 Slawek Zak <slawek.zak at gmail.com>:
> Gah, it's macroexpanded twice! :)

Yeah, I guessed it was something like that but had no time to check.

Edi.



From lispercat at gmail.com  Sun Mar  8 15:29:30 2009
From: lispercat at gmail.com (Andrei Stebakov)
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 11:29:30 -0400
Subject: [cl-who-devel] regression for *attribute-quote-char* in
	cl-who-0.11.1
Message-ID: <affe56e00903080829nfab6966oaa2774a64fdb1f5f@mail.gmail.com>

in cl-who-0.11.0 the *attribute-quote-char* works well:

(let ((cl-who:*attribute-quote-char* #\"))
  (with-html-output-to-string (*standard-output* nil :prologue nil :indent nil)
    (:p :onmouseover "func()")))

produces:
"<p onmouseover=\"func()\"></p>"

in cl-who-0.11.1 it produces "<p onmouseover='func()'></p>"

Thank you,
Andrei



From edi at agharta.de  Mon Mar  9 22:04:57 2009
From: edi at agharta.de (Edi Weitz)
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 23:04:57 +0100
Subject: [cl-who-devel] regression for *attribute-quote-char* in
	cl-who-0.11.1
In-Reply-To: <affe56e00903080829nfab6966oaa2774a64fdb1f5f@mail.gmail.com>
References: <affe56e00903080829nfab6966oaa2774a64fdb1f5f@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b56421a00903091504p7a9f89dybfb4a77e693f9ebc@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 4:29 PM, Andrei Stebakov <lispercat at gmail.com> wrote:
> in cl-who-0.11.0 the *attribute-quote-char* works well:
>
> (let ((cl-who:*attribute-quote-char* #\"))
> ?(with-html-output-to-string (*standard-output* nil :prologue nil :indent nil)
> ? ?(:p :onmouseover "func()")))
>
> produces:
> "<p onmouseover=\"func()\"></p>"
>
> in cl-who-0.11.1 it produces "<p onmouseover='func()'></p>"

Thanks for the report.  Please try the current development version
which I just put here:

  http://bknr.net/trac/browser/trunk/thirdparty/cl-who

I think it works there.

Thanks,
Edi.