Re: [WebERP-developers] TableRows()

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

There are many places where we could increase abstraction and I agree 
there is a happy medium/compromise position, we have quite a bit and 
there is a lot of scope for more.
Of course Andrew and Ricard both have valid ideas.
I really don't want bugs introduced for the sake of abstraction.
Can we focus on new stuff?


Phil



On 2014-09-10 12:26, gilberto dos santos alves wrote:
> +1 from me.
> 
> 2014-09-09 21:51 GMT-03:00 Pak Ricard <pak...@gm...>:
> 
>> Hi all:
>> 
>> Following on Andrew's POV, we calculate the demand of one item 10
>> times in webERP and it takes 94 lines of code (if I'm not wrong).
>> 
>> I think it is a much readable script if we have a function called
>> CalculateDemandForItem ($StockId, $Location) and we encapsulate the
>> 94 lines there.
>> 
>> Sharing Andrew's <OPINION>, we save 9 * 94 lines of repeated code
>> and we get a much readable script.
>> 
>> There are dozens of similar situations in webERP, where I think we
>> can improve readability and reduce the chances of bugs, as 1 fix
>> fixes all.
>> 
>> Hope we can find a reasonable point where all feel comfortable.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Ricard
>> 
>> 2014-09-09 3:48 GMT+08:00 Andrew Galuski <aga...@re...>:
>> 
>> 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 [1]
>> 
>> 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/ [2]
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> 
>> Web-erp-developers mailing list
>> 
>> Web...@li...
>> 
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers [3]
>> 
>> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>> [4]
>> _______________________________________________
>> Web-erp-developers mailing list
>> Web...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers [3]
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  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
> [4]
> _______________________________________________
>  Web-erp-developers mailing list
>  Web...@li...
>  https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers [3]
> 
> --
> gilberto dos santos alves
> +55.11.98646-5049
> sao paulo - sp - brasil
> 
> 
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1] http://www.logicworks.co.nz
> [2] http://tv.slashdot.org/
> [3] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/web-erp-developers
> [4]
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157508191&amp;iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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