Allow to prepend hashes

[mgol]

I prefer the format used by grunt-rev which prepended hashes instead of appending them. It's easier to handle as in other tasks Grunt configuration I can catch both files via prepending {*,} to the pattern. grunt-filerev appends the hash before the extension so I actually need to know extensions of matched files to be able to match them both.

Could you add a configuration option to prepend instead of appending? Am I missing something?

[eddiemonge]

Does filename-* not work here?

[mgol]

Do you mean filename.*? I don't know what you mean; the use case is that I have a pattern for file names in a variable pattern and I need to transform it. Now I just use '{*.,}' + pattern, how would I achieve the same effect when hashes are appended?

[eddiemonge]

Im not sure what you mean exactly. Could you give a more info on the pattern?

[mgol]

OK, it's not a pattern but a variable.

I have a task that grabs an HTML file and finds blocks enclosed in comments:

<!-- useMinAndConcat someFile.js -->

and

<!-- endUseMinAndConcat -->

then preprocesses script tags inside the block in the preparation task. Next, other tasks generate a bundle file (concatenated, minified etc.) and put the resulting bundle in someFile.js. Then the final stage of useMinAndConcat is performed that replaces the contents between its control comments with a single script tag to the resulting bundle. It already knows the file name but it's passed through grunt-rev so instead of writing:

<script src="/someFile.js"></script>

the path written to src is grunt.file.expand('{*.,}' + destFile) where destFile is someFile.js - it's taken from the template.

Now, to do the same with grunt-filerev I'd have to do grunt.file.expand(destFile.replace(/\.js$/, '') + '{,.*}.js' ) which is unecessarily verbose and assumes I know the extension (which might not be true in other cases). I can extract the extension by myself but it's really adding way too much code than it used to; simply prepending the hash would solve all this problems to me.

[eddiemonge]

You can't map the output of grunt.filerev.summary to get what you need so you dont need the pattern?

[mgol]

Hmm, I guess I can try that. I'll check if all my use cases can be covered by that.

[mgol]

It seems all my use cases can be solved using grunt.filerev.summary; I'm closing the ticket then.