Discussion on 1.4

ridgerunner · 2009-07-11 14:22:26

elbekko wrote:

... I'd like to bring part of this discussion to the community. ...

And yet when they respond, you simply disregard their opinion because they obviously don't know what they are talking about! I may be new to the Pun/Flux development community, but I am certainly not new to programming. I've been working as a software engineer since 1981 and have a LOT of experience that you might just want to cultivate - including expertise in regular expressions which (from looking at the code), you guys could use some help with. As I said before, the first 2 (non-trivial) regexs I looked at in detail in the 1.3 parser have errors. I found no such errors in the 1.2 code (of the ones I looked at - but those aren't perfect either).

But it sounds like you have already made up your minds.

Reines · 2009-07-11 14:40:45

Personally I would be tempted to keep the old parser for 1.4, this does sound like feature-creep to me, but since I have been absent for pretty much all of the development of 1.4 and don't aim to use it myself I'm really not too fussed either way.

@ridgerunner: You do make some good points, but keep in mind a bigger filesize doesn't always equate to worse performance (and I'm sure no-one is worried about 14kb space on their server), in fact the main reason for the size increase is because it now does both pre and post parsing - meaning the post parsing (that is done on each view) does less work and should be quicker. Also if there are errors in the regex' used in 1.3, please point them out.

elbekko · 2009-07-11 15:00:15

ridgerunner wrote:

elbekko wrote:
... I'd like to bring part of this discussion to the community. ...
And yet when they respond, you simply disregard their opinion because they obviously don't know what they are talking about! I may be new to the Pun/Flux development community, but I am certainly not new to programming. I've been working as a software engineer since 1981 and have a LOT of experience that you might just want to cultivate - including expertise in regular expressions which (from looking at the code), you guys could use some help with. As I said before, the first 2 (non-trivial) regexs I looked at in detail in the 1.3 parser have errors. I found no such errors in the 1.2 code (of the ones I looked at - but those aren't perfect either).
But it sounds like you have already made up your minds.

Feel free to post improvements then, instead of just saying "no, this can't possbily be good."
As for personally attacking me, I really don't give a damn, but it doesn't really make your opinion any more valid (quite the opposite, in fact).

Paul · 2009-07-11 16:04:53

ridgerunner: the problem with the alt attribute is an accessibility issue. Specifically 1.2 does not allow the poster to set the alt attribute which of course is a major issue for anybody who cannot see the image. Whether that is a problem in the real world can be debated but it does mean that forum owners who want to make their forums accessible are unable to do so. The current default of using the url is no benefit to anyone. The paragraph issue is more just a question of doing things right. A post which looks like it has 10 paragraphs should actually have 10 paragraphs rather than one block of text divided by br's.

joe.banana · 2009-07-11 18:10:02

so any estimates when this will be officially release? cant wait.

ridgerunner · 2009-07-11 23:19:11

Paul wrote:

ridgerunner: the problem with the alt attribute is an accessibility issue. Specifically 1.2 does not allow the poster to set the alt attribute which of course is a major issue for anybody who cannot see the image. Whether that is a problem in the real world can be debated but it does mean that forum owners who want to make their forums accessible are unable to do so. The current default of using the url is no benefit to anyone. The paragraph issue is more just a question of doing things right. A post which looks like it has 10 paragraphs should actually have 10 paragraphs rather than one block of text divided by br's.

I too, am a "standardista" and am all for semantic, accessible markup (and separation of markup, style and behavior - this is one of the things that led me to PunBB in the first place.) I agree that having an ALT attribute would be a very good thing. As for the <br />, I would say that two newlines in a row '\n\n' should be converted to a paragraph, but one by itself converted to a <br />. At first glance at the code, this would appear to be a pretty minor change to the 1.2 parser.

Reines wrote:

... Also if there are errors in the regex' used in 1.3, please point them out.

I'm working on a detailed write up as we speak. (Unfortunately I won't be able to post it here because the regexs themselves have BBcode tags embedded inside them which confuses the forum parser even when placed inside a CODE tag. D'oh!)

elbekko wrote:

... As for personally attacking me, I really don't give a damn, but it doesn't really make your opinion any more valid (quite the opposite, in fact).

If it sounded as though I was attacking you personally, I apologize. I never intended that tone at all. I was just giving my critical input which was requested by the topic of this thread. I know that it is one thing to complain about how bad something is, and quite another to instead offer solutions to the problems. In that spirit, I'll be offering some positive contributions shortly...

Reines · 2009-07-11 23:48:15

ridgerunner wrote:

I'm working on a detailed write up as we speak

Nice one, cheers

elbekko · 2009-07-12 13:09:59

ridgerunner wrote:

In that spirit, I'll be offering some positive contributions shortly...

Great, that's the way I like it

ridgerunner · 2009-07-12 18:03:57

Here is my analysis of the first two regexes in the 1.4.1078 parser.php (and recommendations for improvements):

FluxBB Parser Regular Expressions

(Something only an obsessive pedantic regex-geek could love!)

Note: I just finished it and have not had a chance to thoroughly proof read it yet. (I have to leave for the day.)

Enjoy!

elbekko · 2009-07-12 22:44:45

ridgerunner wrote:

FluxBB Parser Regular Expressions

That was an excellent read, thanks for that! I'll see about implementing and testing it tomorrow.

liquidat0r · 2009-07-13 10:09:35

ridgerunner wrote:

FluxBB Parser Regular Expressions

Wow, that's somewhat detailed!

elbekko · 2009-07-13 13:55:40

And done in [1080].

citricsquid · 2009-07-13 13:58:39

Please have a proper new posts system for 1.4. Probably the wrong place, but it really is annoying; I want to run fluxbb for my forum because it's really well built and caters to all my needs + it's very easy to integrate extra stuff but it's making my users angry because there isn't a functioning new posts / unread posts feature, it just does from last visit which sucks. Make it work plx

ridgerunner · 2009-07-13 15:19:00

I proofread the article and made a few changes/corrections. Check the Revision History page for details.

FluxBB Parser Regular Expressions

Note: For some reason, this article does not yet print correctly under Firefox2 or IE6. It does print correctly from Opera9 (not sure about any other browsers/versions).

ridgerunner · 2009-07-14 14:10:01

Made one important change. It turns out that the erroneous regex on line 74 also occurs on lines 535 and 648 of parser.php version 1078. And in the latest version (1080), this regex was fixed on line 74, but still occurs on lines 535, 648 and now in a new location: line 683.

FluxBB Parser Regular Expressions

Cheers - Jeff Roberson

elbekko · 2009-07-14 14:19:42

Fixed in [1081].

look3r · 2009-08-15 19:31:38

thnx

Ledo · 2009-08-15 23:09:34

That looks wicked! Regex mastery.

qie · 2009-12-15 14:51:39

we should use 1.3 's parser i think.
i think,there is some bug on 1.2 's style system.

like "random bottom white space on viewtopic pages"

Paul · 2009-12-15 14:56:24

1.4 does use the parser from 1.3.

Forums

#26 2009-07-11 14:22:26

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#27 2009-07-11 14:40:45

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#28 2009-07-11 15:00:15

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#29 2009-07-11 16:04:53

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#30 2009-07-11 18:10:02

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#31 2009-07-11 23:19:11

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#32 2009-07-11 23:48:15

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#33 2009-07-12 13:09:59

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#34 2009-07-12 18:03:57

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#35 2009-07-12 22:44:45

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#36 2009-07-13 10:09:35

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#37 2009-07-13 13:55:40

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#38 2009-07-13 13:58:39

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#39 2009-07-13 15:19:00

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#40 2009-07-14 14:10:01

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#41 2009-07-14 14:19:42

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#42 2009-08-15 19:31:38

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#43 2009-08-15 23:09:34

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#44 2009-12-15 14:51:39

Re: Discussion on 1.4

#45 2009-12-15 14:56:24

Re: Discussion on 1.4

Board footer