Re: [SMARTY-DEV] Re: [SMARTY] modifier_string_format in 2.5.0-RC1

Hmm, I'm not the originating author of the modifier structure, but I'll take a guess :-) Function attributes have name/value pairs so an associative array makes sense, and order is not an issue. OTOH, modifier parameters are only values so their order is important. I suppose they could have been passed as an enumerated array of values, that way the second parameter can be the smarty object much the same as functions are. But then your modifier would need to know what each value of $params[0], $params[1], etc. are for without an intuitive name. Monte > Ok, I see the difference and how it works now, though I can't say that > it is the most intuitive implementation. Usually the modifier modifies > the string it is attached to, not the other way around. For people like > myself who want it the other way, and for the sake of backwards > compatibility, one can simply register the modifier in the code as I > have done. > > As an idea for being able to attach what is basically a dynamic amount > of arguments to a modifier, why don't you make modifiers work the way > function plugins do: pass a $params variable that is an array of all the > arguments? That seems to be somewhat logical and at the same time > backwards compatible with existing templates, even though all modifier > plugins will have to be rewritten. > > ~Paul -- Monte Ohrt <monte@ispi.net>