Re: [WebERP-developers] TableRows()

[<ph...@lo...>]

Preferable for really high use code as the user knows where to find it. 
I like to keep includes to a minimum too though. Some repetition of the 
code is a consequence ... I accept this of course.

Phil

On 2014-09-08 13:48, Andrew Galuski wrote:
> Would it be any different if the code was copied into an include
> instead of a function and we replaced the lines of code with
> 
> include('includes/tablerow.inc');
> 
> This is what we do with header.inc and footer.inc. We don't repeat
> that code in every script (Thank goodness).
> 
> <OPINION>
> 
> I think a minimal level of abstraction would make changes less
> daunting. If I know I can concentrate on business logic and not
> formatting I would be willing to make more enhancements.
> 
> Enhancements might also be done more quickly, tested faster and be
> more stable. An example is a recent change to introduce location based
> security to WebERP that I submitted. I had seen in the forums multiple
> times people looking to restrict access to locations within a
> particular business function. Example Warehouse worked can see
> inventory levels at Location A but not Location B. In order to make
> this change I had to modify every script where there was a location
> selection list.
> 
> I had to modify the code as follows:
> 
> BEFORE: $sql = "SELECT loccode, locationname FROM locations
> 
> AFTER: $sql = "SELECT locations.loccode, locationname, canview FROM
> locations
> 
>  INNER JOIN locationusers ON locationusers.loccode=locations.loccode
> AND locationusers.userid='" . $_SESSION['UserID'] . "' AND
> locationusers.canview=1"
> 
> That line alone appears like 50+ times in 50+ files. The same code to
> build the <select> takes around 15 lines of code before and after that
> SQL that is nearly identical in every script.
> 
> If all of that code was in an include file or in a function I could
> have added a feature people requested in less than 1 day instead of 5
> days. And testing it would have been a lot faster. If the logic is in
> 1 place I can test my change in < 5 screens be confident it is
> working. If I have to change 50 scripts I need to test all 50
> scripts…Because even the smallest typo can make a script break.
> 
> Abstraction and reduced code can be a good thing
> 
> </OPINION>
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Andrew
> 
> FROM: Phil Daintree [mailto:ph...@lo...]
>  SENT: Tuesday, September 02, 2014 1:25 AM
>  TO: webERP Developers
>  SUBJECT: Re: [WebERP-developers] TableRows()
> 
> Ricard,
> 
>  There are many many ways to reduce the amount of code in webERP - we
> really could take loads out... but the sacrifice is readability - I
> don't believe we would gain speed/efficiency.
>  If we made the tables a class as per Jonathan's idea we could take
> out buckets of code - this would be the obvious extension of the
>  I don't want to change the code to increase abstraction ever - or
> code that does the same thing a different way that could potentially
> introduce new bugs. Nope - the effort should be not to reinvent what
> we have, but to add functionality using the same blocks and structure
> as we have.
> 
>  I believe you learnt php from webERP - and are a living example as to
> why the phil-osophy behind webERP's development style is one of it's
> greatest strengths...
> 
> Phil
> 
> Phil Daintree
> 
> Logic Works Ltd - +64 (0)275 567890
> 
> http://www.logicworks.co.nz [3]
> 
> On 02/09/14 13:12, Pak Ricard wrote:
> 
>> Hi Phil:
>> 
>> I saw with satisfaction the commit 6859 where Rafael used the
>> TableRows() functions in some scripts. Now, I saw this change was
>> reverted, and I can't see but good things about it (probably i'm
>> missing something).
>> 
>> These same 6 lines are repeated over and over webERP (probably over
>> 100 times), so if we get a change to reduce the number of lines and
>> still get a readable script, I think it's worth it.
>> 
>> Well just my 2 cents. I would love to know your POV (and any other
>> developer's) about it :-)
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Ricard
>> 
>> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 
>> Slashdot TV.
>> 
>> Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
>> 
>> http://tv.slashdot.org/ [1]
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 
>> Web-erp-developers mailing list
>> 
>> Web...@li...
>> 
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers [2]
> 
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://tv.slashdot.org/
> [2] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers
> [3] http://www.logicworks.co.nz
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Want excitement?
> Manually upgrade your production database.
> When you want reliability, choose Perforce
> Perforce version control. Predictably reliable.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Web-erp-developers mailing list
> Web...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers