extra_rules_top should take priority over extra_permastructs

[prettyboymp]

Since extra_rules_top are specifically added instead of generated like the those from the extra_permastructs which runs through generate_rewrite_ruls(), shouldn't the extra_rules_top take priority in conflicts?

[scribu]

Makes sense.

[filosofo]

Won't that put the "top" rules last?

[prettyboymp]

Replying to filosofo:

Won't that put the "top" rules last?

Good catch. Adding a new patch.

[prettyboymp]

made sure top rules stayed first

[dd32]

Using array_reverse like that looks like an ugly hack to me, If i'm understanding this correctly, perhaps we can add the permastructs to a separate array, and then merge it after the loop?

Reseting to needs-patch given this will be stale now (I've changed that block)

[prettyboymp]

Added updated patch. I went with dd32's suggestion of using a separate array for permastructs.

I switched to using the '+' operator instead of array_merge in the final rule merging. I would think this is the effect that was originally desired when this when this was created.

[chriscct7]

Patch is still good to merge, and I like the idea behind this one. Tagging for re-review