Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Fix nested shortcode bugs #261
Fix nested shortcode bugs #261
Changes from 3 commits
34dfa75
455514e
fedfd0c
736f10a
cefde48
392bfae
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As someone that almost came close to this while working on #260, I must ask:
WDYT if, instead of trying to re-create the shortcode content in a shortcode callback, we force the escape on the shortcodes outside
$this->shortcodes
inshortcode_hack_extra_escape_escaped_shortcodes
?I'm just a bit worried that this might cause weird conflicts with other plugins, especially as the fact that shortcodes rely on regex..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I considered an approach similar to what you described. However, it introduced even more edge cases to handle. That's why I opted to rewrite everything, letting WordPress manage the registered shortcodes/nested shortcodes.
As I highlighted in the PR description, I recognize that this is an intrusive approach. I took extra care during the implementation to address the edge cases specified in the description, and based on my findings, it seems like it won't break anything.
I share your concerns about potential conflicts. If this is deemed too intrusive, one alternative could be introducing a new setting to exclude all shortcodes except for
[code]
. The idea of removing[c]
was even discussed in #72. To address @Viper007Bond's concerns about breaking sites (#71), we could activate this shortcode removal only when the setting is enabled, keeping it off by default.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As we discussed, a less intrusive method was employed in cefde48. Thanks for pointing out the existence of
pre_do_shortcode_tag
!There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Great, thanks!