Yep, that's a reasonable compromise.	

On 16/04/2013, at 1:08 PM, Nico Haase <notifications@github.com> wrote:

> In model/Image.php:
> 
> > @@ -566,13 +566,29 @@ private function getGeneratedImages() {
> >  		}
> >  		// All generate functions may appear any number of times in the image cache name.
> >  		$generateFuncs = implode('|', $generateFuncs);
> > -		$pattern = "/^((?P<Generator>{$generateFuncs})(?P<Arg1>\d*)x(?P<Arg2>\d*)\-)+" . preg_quote($this->Name) . "$/i";
> > +		$pattern = "/^((?P<Generator>{$generateFuncs})(?P<Args>((\d*(x?))*))\-)+" . preg_quote($this->Name) . "$/i";
> > +		$subPattern = "/(?P<Generator>{$generateFuncs})(?P<Args>((\d*(x?))*))\-/i";
> So, just one more question about that pattern, as written below: Should we add a check to cacheFilename() to ensure that a generated filename also matches the pattern? This should throw an error when someone introduces new argument types
> 
> —
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.
>