currentTiddler in function - Is this odd or am I missing something?

[TW_Tones]

Folks,

to solve this issue;

Getting the name of an html link dragged over to a TW

Unfortunately this is often dependant on the location of the link, the browser in use, and the destination. Not only that the link so created may not behave the way you want it to for example; [[New Tiddler|file:///T:/!Working/test-cm6-in-26.html#New Tiddler]] will always open in a new tab. I created the above using a pretty permalink button I just remade. To support pretty links to permalinks. TiddlyWiki to TiddlyWiki. Buttons_permalink2.json (1.9 KB) Note: if you drag the above link to a …

I wrote a function as follows;

\function pretty.permalink() [<open-sq>] [<currentTiddler>] [<close-sq>] [[(]] [{$:/info/url/full}] [[#]] [<currentTiddler>] [[)]]  +[join[]]
\define open-sq() [
\define close-sq() ]

<<pretty.permalink>>

I dont understand the result;

[](file:///I:////!Master/KeyWikis/BlogToSelf.html#New Blog Tiddler 13)

Why does the [] not contain the current tiddler?

Even this simple form

\function pretty.permalink() [<currentTiddler>] [[something]] [<currentTiddler>] +[join[]]

<<pretty.permalink>>

Fails with the first use of [<currentTiddler>] not being returned.

Tested in TW 5.3.7, 5.3.8 and 5.4.0-prerelease now

[etardiff]

You need to add the =/:all filter run prefix before [<currentTiddler>] (and any other repeated strings) to prevent deduplication. Otherwise, only the last instance of a given string will be preserved in the results.

Incidentally, for functions that use “problematic” characters like square brackets, I often like to define the special characters as parameters of the function (following any parameters that might be set dynamically). So I might rewrite your function like this:

\function pretty.permalink(open-sq:"[", close-sq:"]") [<open-sq>] =[<currentTiddler>] [<close-sq>] [[(]] [{$:/info/url/full}] [[#]] =[<currentTiddler>] [[)]] +[join[]]

<<pretty.permalink>>

Of course, if you use <<open-sq>> and <<close-sq>> frequently, it makes more sense to make them global variables (which you may already have done!) But for more ad hoc situations, like regex, I find it very convenient to keep all my static variables in the same function.