[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [PATCH] hopefully fix #1036

From: Francisco Vila
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hopefully fix #1036
Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 09:26:26 +0200

2010/5/18 Graham Percival <address@hidden>:
> I tried to remove the #foo if "foo" matched
> the "foo.html" portion, but I couldn't easily get rid of the #.

Now I understand certain mysterious pieces of code. lc_last was broken
and so was remove_unneeded_anchor. I will concentrate on removing the
# part completely.

>>(we agree in that target
>> and anchors must match, do we?)
> No, we don't agree.  In >80% of our links, we don't need the #foo
> portion at all, and they only get in the way.  As long as they
> don't *break* anything, I don't mind having a #foo there, but they
> *do* break things on the website.

t2h has obvious mistakes in the code, but I think there are few things
we can not do in our hook functions.
Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) ,

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]