@FILE isn't inherited by @INHERIT. Thoughts? [PATCH PROVIDED]

Hi all.
Using @FILE bindings a bit more due to having a few developers and needing to keep things in source control. Wondering if anybody’s ever come up against @FILE bindings not being @INHERITed. If so, any solutions?

If not, anybody have any thoughts? In the @INHERIT code, it basically skips values if they start with the "@", which makes sense if it’s skipping up the tree past another @INHERIT, but wouldn’t it be useful to not skip other bindings like @FILE (or others, though for what we’re doing only @FILE would matter)?

On the one hand, I’m assuming there’s a good reason it’s checking just for @ and not @INHERIT, but on the other hand, this is the document parser we’re talking about (I’ll be glad to start exploring Revo once we have more time.)

Replying to myself. Changing:

to

seems to do the trick. I’ve only done very quick testing at this point, but ... Just remembers that a lot of people hate regex, and it’s not as fast, so this seems to work too:


Thoughts on that? Anybody see any reasons this would be problematic?

Second update: While I was in there I thought it’d be nice if @INHERIT allowed something like:

I have it mostly working (with the @FILE bindings too), but I’ll test that more before I share it, since it’s late and I don’t want to look like an idiot It does seem to work though, except that the anything extra after the @INHERIT won’t be passed on to descendants. So just the @INHERIT block actually inherits, not any extra stuff.

I’d love some feedback though. Like I said, it’s late and maybe I’m missing an obvious problem.

Cool. Off to JIRA for you Mr. Florio.

http://svn.modxcms.com/jira/browse/MODX-1568
In case anybody wants that patch before it makes it into the core. Isn’t quite @INHERITPLUS or @INHERIT+ (ticket here), but close. See the ticket for notes on the limitations of extending the inheritance.