Menu
▾
▴
webmacro-devel — Discuss development issues related to the core of WebMacro
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2002 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(28) |
Dec
(47) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2003 |
Jan
(103) |
Feb
(44) |
Mar
(65) |
Apr
(140) |
May
(72) |
Jun
(233) |
Jul
(466) |
Aug
(51) |
Sep
(2) |
Oct
(17) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(7) |
| 2004 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
(5) |
Mar
(28) |
Apr
(9) |
May
(7) |
Jun
|
Jul
(7) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2005 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(3) |
May
(24) |
Jun
(7) |
Jul
(2) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(12) |
| 2006 |
Jan
|
Feb
(3) |
Mar
(8) |
Apr
(59) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(24) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(3) |
| 2007 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(8) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(1) |
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(7) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2008 |
Jan
|
Feb
(1) |
Mar
(16) |
Apr
(2) |
May
(2) |
Jun
|
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(3) |
Sep
(9) |
Oct
(9) |
Nov
(44) |
Dec
(34) |
| 2009 |
Jan
(12) |
Feb
(14) |
Mar
(11) |
Apr
(16) |
May
(41) |
Jun
(19) |
Jul
(33) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(3) |
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
(7) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
(50) |
Mar
(3) |
Apr
(2) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2011 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(16) |
Dec
|
| 2012 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(3) |
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: Lane S. <la...@op...> - 2003-07-30 01:50:54
|
Marc Palmer wrote: > > There are a bunch of examples in /examples that use OpenDoors code > that doesn't appear to be in CVS, so you can't build them. These were not intended to be compiled. This was code for showing how to write action handlers and things like that. Should they be removed? > > > While useful to have more examples, anything that does not build and > uses non-WM classes should not be in the /examples tree in my opinion. I agree. I will add this to my to do list. Probably move them to a contrib area or just zap them. > > > Perhaps we should a separate CVS module that is just used to produce a > ZIP as part of the WM build process? This shouldn't be part of > wm-optional because that should build a complete JAR that can be used > instantly - i.e. directives, tools etc. only. Agreed. > > > Marc > -- Lane Sharman Learn About Conga, All Java GUI Builder: http://opendoors.com/conga |
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-29 19:11:11
|
I committed a fix to #count for implicit -1 step if start > end, but the
cvs notification mails haven't come through.
I updated the unit test too.
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
|
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-29 16:29:07
|
There are a bunch of examples in /examples that use OpenDoors code that
doesn't appear to be in CVS, so you can't build them.
While useful to have more examples, anything that does not build and uses
non-WM classes should not be in the /examples tree in my opinion.
Perhaps we should a separate CVS module that is just used to produce a ZIP
as part of the WM build process? This shouldn't be part of wm-optional
because that should build a complete JAR that can be used instantly - i.e.
directives, tools etc. only.
Marc
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
|
|
From: Eric B. R. <eb...@tc...> - 2003-07-29 14:58:03
|
On Tuesday, July 29, 2003, at 10:52 AM, Marc Palmer wrote: > Should we add the outstanding Whitespace issues Keats brought to my > attention, to the bug tracker? I suppose we should so we don't forget > them. There are some things that should be forgotten. eric |
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-29 14:55:22
|
On Tue, 29 Jul 2003 10:41:41 -0400 (GMT), Keats <ke...@su...> wrote: > Eric, > > I updated the WebMacroBugs page, http://www.webmacro.org/WebMacroBugs, to > point to the SourceForge bug tracker, > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=64597&atid=508034 NICE! I am so glad to see the back of that. Someone spent far too much time writing Bugzilla instead of fixing bugs in their projects, so they had to have an insanely complicated mechanism to deal with the huge number of bugs they had ;-) :) I just added a couple of RFEs relating to the work we have been discussing over the last few days. Should we add the outstanding Whitespace issues Keats brought to my attention, to the bug tracker? I suppose we should so we don't forget them. Marc -- Marc Palmer Contract Java Consultant/Developer w a n g j a m m e r s java and web software design experts with an ethical outlook http://www.wangjammers.org |
|
From: Keats <ke...@su...> - 2003-07-29 14:41:52
|
Eric, I updated the WebMacroBugs page, http://www.webmacro.org/WebMacroBugs, to point to the SourceForge bug tracker, http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?group_id=64597&atid=508034 Would you update the other links on the site? Thanks. Keats |
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-29 09:44:14
|
Guys,
We can now add a SingleInstanceHelpersLoader implementation to WM that will
never create more than once instance of a helper class, and these will only
be added to the context if required.
This is nice, for those thread-safe global helpers. Sure we'd need to sync
for atomic get (null) and put so it's not perfect, but we might be able to
work around that.
We could do this before by breaking the contract of CT and returning an
existing static instance, but now we don't even need to do this fake
factory method for each class. Of course in that situation we didn't need
syncing.
Brian - how's JSR166 progressing?
Marc
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
|
|
From: Brian G. <br...@qu...> - 2003-07-29 08:34:11
|
> I want the (default) WebMacros out, I want the (default) ContextTools out, > I want the (default) global functions out, I want the stupid hang-around > idiotic Threads out - and -everything- that isn't directly related to > WebMacro being a Template engine, OUT. The thread is out. |
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-29 08:16:28
|
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 23:30:58 -0700, Lane Sharman <la...@op...>
wrote:
>
>
> Keats wrote:
>
>>
>> Obviously this would take some discussion -- I don't know if we could do
>> this for 2.0, but maybe 2.5?
>>
> I am eager to close out 2.0 and leave for 2.5 template-centric
> configuration.
>
> btw: I personally do a lot of app configuration with WM and believe there
> is a special role for it but I am not sure we are there yet. For example,
> I want some scheme which does not penalize every template with a global
> include blob. Don't believe we have designed a pathing or loading scheme
> for this yet.
Actually I was envisaging a specific configuration template name used by
WM, set in WebMacro.defaults (yes we'd need to keep some of that).
i.e. like Apache's http.conf (which can include other files) we'd have
someting like a WebMacro.config template which is scanned by default, when
the Broker inits.
It would not require explicit or implicit #include into every template.
We'd bootstrap this WebMacro.config with only the directive(s) required to
do config - i.e. nothing but something like #declare or #config, and maybe
#set. The config template calls those to set up the Broker, and we could
make it so that everything it declares is immediately available to the
config template - so that it could do things like #foreach for complex
automated config... but I'm not sure about this.
Actually though I think before we should consider how to do template-based
config, we should look at and agree on a scheme for abstracting config
completely - i.e. make it so you can add (but maybe not remove) directives
and providers to Broker programmatically using any scheme you like. A bit
like what we are doing for ContextTool now.
This would give the app complete control over config - i.e. using a
WM20LegacyPropertiesFileConfigLoader, a WM25TemplateConfigLoader, or a
MyApplicationCustomConfigLoader.
But I suggest we don't get too far into this now! How about we create a
NextNextRelease page on wiki ;-)
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
|
|
From: <web...@st...> - 2003-07-29 07:58:49
|
On Thu, 24 Jul 2003, Brian Goetz wrote:
|
| >>In other words, its OK to have "magic" stuff, but you want the magic to
| >>be put there by the application architect, not by WM. So what you want
| >>is a mechanism for adding your own magic.
| >
| >No, want the ability for *removing* the things that are magically placed
| >in the context. If this translates to "a more formal plug-in concept",
| >that's fine, but the idea is to eliminate magical stuff, not make it
| >easier to introduce more.
|
| I wasn't clear. I meant that you want _all_ the magic under the
| "applications" control.
|
| My concern is that this is basically assuming one kind of application
| model. I think enumerating the use cases first would shed a lot of light
| on the issue.
Well.. I have a Portal-Portlet type framework. I actually use Context
instead of WebContext to get rid of all the web-type stuff, as giving such
stuff to the Portlet ("Corelet") writer would destroy my entire logic.
So I'm totally for removing -every one- of these tools. But why not just
make it optional? So that you'd have to configure or, even better,
programatically add them yourself?
I want the (default) WebMacros out, I want the (default) ContextTools out,
I want the (default) global functions out, I want the stupid hang-around
idiotic Threads out - and -everything- that isn't directly related to
WebMacro being a Template engine, OUT.
I want a TEMPLATE ENGINE! WebMacro should take a Context - merge it with a
Template - and nothing else.
I could add nifty stuff to the template-writer's universe myself,
provided that the functionality (CTs and GFs) are in the engine. Just
remove the default junk.
Endre.
|
|
From: Lane S. <la...@op...> - 2003-07-29 06:41:47
|
Eric B.Ridge wrote: > On Monday, July 28, 2003, at 05:08 PM, Marc Palmer wrote: > >>> If you don't like getResource() how about just get()? >> >> >> Fine by me! > > > yes, just get() > > eric me three! > > > -- Lane Sharman Learn About Conga, All Java GUI Builder: http://opendoors.com/conga |
|
From: Lane S. <la...@op...> - 2003-07-29 06:40:21
|
Keats wrote: > >Obviously this would take some discussion -- I don't know if we could do this for 2.0, but maybe 2.5? > I am eager to close out 2.0 and leave for 2.5 template-centric configuration. btw: I personally do a lot of app configuration with WM and believe there is a special role for it but I am not sure we are there yet. For example, I want some scheme which does not penalize every template with a global include blob. Don't believe we have designed a pathing or loading scheme for this yet. -Lane > >Keats > > > >-------Original Message------- >From: Marc Palmer <ma...@an...> >Sent: 07/28/03 05:07 PM >To: web...@li... >Subject: [Webmacro-devel] Template based config - a benefit > > > >> >> >Just a thought to throw in. > >Template-based config would be very very very good because it would allow >people to #include common config elements from other projects. > >Thus, it would allow modularisation of config. Template X has a list of >all >directives in it, Template Y has a list of tools to load, Template Z has a > >list of functions and so on. > >This way you can mix and match your environment. > >I seem to remember this idea of templates for config being raised quite a >few months ago and I think I was against it. I'm warming to it. > > > > > -- Lane Sharman Learn About Conga, All Java GUI Builder: http://opendoors.com/conga |
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-28 21:54:32
|
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 17:43:47 -0400 (GMT), Keats <ke...@su...> wrote:
> I agree. If we can use the concurrentMap to enable dynamically deploying
> various types of plugins, then the template mechanism could give us a lot
> of power.
Like I said previously, dynamic deploy could be dangerous/very problematic.
It might be that these templates should not auto-reload.
I think the details of that will "come out in the wash".
> You would have to have some sort of bootstrap configuration that would
> allow you to evaluate the config template. Then you could do nice things
> in the template like:
>
> #include 'standard-directives-init.wm'
> #include 'standard-tools-init.wm'
>
> #if ($ServletMode){
> #include 'servlet-tools.wm'
> }
>
> etc ...
Exactly!
> Plus we could detect changes and update the configuration at runtime
> (with a bit of work).
>
> Obviously this would take some discussion -- I don't know if we could do
> this for 2.0, but maybe 2.5?
Yes I think we should defer this as we have enough to do, but we will no
doubt have a lively discussion about it. Someone could get started on the
scratchpad wiki page detailing the ideas behind this and what problems they
foresee.
Marc
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
|
|
From: Keats <ke...@su...> - 2003-07-28 21:43:54
|
I agree. If we can use the concurrentMap to enable dynamically deploying various types of plugins, then the template mechanism could give us a lot of power.
You would have to have some sort of bootstrap configuration that would allow you to evaluate the config template. Then you could do nice things in the template like:
#include 'standard-directives-init.wm'
#include 'standard-tools-init.wm'
#if ($ServletMode){
#include 'servlet-tools.wm'
}
etc ...
Plus we could detect changes and update the configuration at runtime (with a bit of work).
Obviously this would take some discussion -- I don't know if we could do this for 2.0, but maybe 2.5?
Keats
-------Original Message-------
From: Marc Palmer <ma...@an...>
Sent: 07/28/03 05:07 PM
To: web...@li...
Subject: [Webmacro-devel] Template based config - a benefit
>
>
Just a thought to throw in.
Template-based config would be very very very good because it would allow
people to #include common config elements from other projects.
Thus, it would allow modularisation of config. Template X has a list of
all
directives in it, Template Y has a list of tools to load, Template Z has a
list of functions and so on.
This way you can mix and match your environment.
I seem to remember this idea of templates for config being raised quite a
few months ago and I think I was against it. I'm warming to it.
--
Marc Palmer
|
|
From: Eric B. R. <eb...@tc...> - 2003-07-28 21:17:51
|
On Monday, July 28, 2003, at 05:08 PM, Marc Palmer wrote: >> If you don't like getResource() how about just get()? > > Fine by me! yes, just get() eric |
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-28 21:10:47
|
Just a thought to throw in.
Template-based config would be very very very good because it would allow
people to #include common config elements from other projects.
Thus, it would allow modularisation of config. Template X has a list of all
directives in it, Template Y has a list of tools to load, Template Z has a
list of functions and so on.
This way you can mix and match your environment.
I seem to remember this idea of templates for config being raised quite a
few months ago and I think I was against it. I'm warming to it.
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
|
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-28 21:10:46
|
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:54:49 -0400 (GMT), Keats <ke...@su...> wrote:
> The point is that you're not getting a Variable, you're getting a value
> that will be referenced through a Variable. A variable is a specific
> thing in WM and I don't want to muddy the concepts any more than we have
> to.
I know about Variable in WM, but nobody really uses it directly and few
people know it exists. :)
> If you don't like getResource() how about just get()?
Fine by me!
Marc
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
|
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-28 21:06:34
|
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 14:14:30 -0700, Lane Sharman <la...@op...>
wrote:
> try rewriting it like a real programmer:
Ooooh, throwing down the gauntelet of manliness eh?!
> if () { } else { }
> and see what you get.
Well it's OK now in IE without any explicit begin/end. Its still broken in
Opera. It looks like a browser bug.
;-(
Marc
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
|
|
From: Keats <ke...@su...> - 2003-07-28 20:59:03
|
The point is that you're not getting a Variable, you're getting a value that will be referenced through a Variable. A variable is a specific thing in WM and I don't want to muddy the concepts any more than we have to.
If you don't like getResource() how about just get()?
Keats
-------Original Message-------
From: Marc Palmer <ma...@an...>
Sent: 07/28/03 04:44 PM
To: ke...@su..., la...@op...
Subject: Re: Re: [Webmacro-devel] ContexTool change info Wiki
>
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:37:59 -0400 (GMT), Keats <ke...@su...> wrote:
> I have to quibble with the method name getVariable(). We're not getting
> a Variable, we're getting an Object. More specifically we're getting an
> object that is deployed as a resource to the context. This may seem
> trivial, but I think this name could be a major source of confusion in
> the future (as some of our other names have been).
I see your point, but surely that's what we -are-actually doing. i.e. the
things that are in the Context are colloquially called "variables" (i.e.
template variables) and as such I think it makes sense.
> So maybe it should be:
>
> AutoContextLoader.getResource()
>
> or alternatively:
>
> getHelper()
> getPlugin()
> getValue()
> getObject()
> get()
> retrieve()
> getThingie()
> ...
>
> Since what can be returned is totally generic, it's hard to come up with
> a meaningful name. getResource() seems best to me, but any of the above
> would be better than getVariable.
getResource sounds too much like loading files/URLs IMO.
How about newContextVariable( name, context) ?
Marc
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including
Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now.
Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio
.NET.
http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01
_______________________________________________
Webmacro-devel mailing list
Web...@li...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/webmacro-devel
>
|
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-28 20:56:09
|
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:50:32 -0400 (GMT), Keats <ke...@su...> wrote: > Check out the Wiki: http://www.webmacro.org/WhiteSpace > > There are two know whitespace handling bugs noted there, one deals with > implicit #begin's and the other with implicit #end's. You're issue is > apparently the implicit #end. This occurs when you use #else or #elseif > with a preceding #end (or close bracket). Try adding an #end before your > #else. > > Keats > > P.S. If you want to try and fix these parser bugs, you would be doing a > great service to WM! Haha, if that means diving into JavaCC you must be joking! I really don't have time for that... if it's conventional java code I might be able to have a stab at it. Marc -- Marc Palmer Contract Java Consultant/Developer w a n g j a m m e r s java and web software design experts with an ethical outlook http://www.wangjammers.org |
|
From: Lane S. <la...@op...> - 2003-07-28 20:56:07
|
try rewriting it like a real programmer:
if () { } else { }
and see what you get.
-Lane
Marc Palmer wrote:
>
> Guys I just noticed something funny in some HTML output from WM:
>
> <SELECT class="fieldentry" NAME="_dob_day"> <OPTION
> VALUE="- None-" > -None-
> <OPTION VALUE="1" > 1
> <OPTION VALUE="2" > 2
> <OPTION VALUE="3" > 3
> <OPTION VALUE="4" > 4
> <OPTION VALUE="5" > 5
> <OPTION VALUE="6" > 6
> <OPTION VALUE="7" > 7
> <OPTION VALUE="8" > 8
> <OPTION VALUE="9" > 9
> <OPTION VALUE="10" > 10
> <OPTION VALUE="11" > 11
> <OPTION VALUE="12" > 12
> <OPTION VALUE="13" > 13
> <OPTION VALUE="14" > 14
> <OPTION VALUE="15" > 15
> <OPTION VALUE="16" > 16
> <OPTION VALUE="17" > 17
> <OPTION VALUE="18" > 18
> <OPTION VALUE="19" > 19
> <OPTION VALUE="20" > 20
> <OPTION VALUE="21" > 21
> <OPTION VALUE="22" > 22
> <OPTION VALUE="23" > 23
> <OPTION VALUE="24" > 24
> <OPTION VALUE="25" > 25
> <OPTION VALUE="26" SELECTED> 26
> <OPTION VALUE="27" > 27
> <OPTION VALUE="28" > 28
> <OPTION VALUE="29" > 29
> <OPTION VALUE="30" > 30
> <OPTION VALUE="31" > 31
> </SELECT>
>
> The bit that is "funny" is option 26. Why does it have an extra space?
>
> The code that proced it is:
>
> #macro intFieldChoice($action, $sch, $fieldValue, $showNoneItem)
> <SELECT class="choiceField"
> NAME="$OuterVars.Ignition.getFormFieldName($fieldValue.FormFieldName)">
> #if ($showNoneItem)
> <OPTION> -Choose-
> #end
> #foreach $choice in $fieldValue.MetaData
> #if ($choice.Value == $fieldValue.Value)
> #set $isChecked = "SELECTED"
> #else
> #set $isChecked = ""
> #end
> <OPTION VALUE="$choice.Value" $isChecked> $choice.Label
> #end
> </SELECT>
> #showRequired( $fieldValue)
> #end
>
> ...and I can't see how an extra space gets in there just when the
> option is SELECTED.
>
> Does anybody else think that this might be an obscure whitespace issue?
>
> The only thing I can think of is that the line that assigns "SELECTED"
> is the first part of the #if clause.
>
> If people think this is not supposed to happen, then I will try to
> isolate it and add to the WS unit tests.
>
> Marc
--
Lane Sharman
Learn About Conga, All Java GUI Builder: http://opendoors.com/conga
|
|
From: Keats <ke...@su...> - 2003-07-28 20:50:37
|
Check out the Wiki: http://www.webmacro.org/WhiteSpace There are two know whitespace handling bugs noted there, one deals with implicit #begin's and the other with implicit #end's. You're issue is apparently the implicit #end. This occurs when you use #else or #elseif with a preceding #end (or close bracket). Try adding an #end before your #else. Keats P.S. If you want to try and fix these parser bugs, you would be doing a great service to WM! -------Original Message------- From: Marc Palmer <ma...@an...> Sent: 07/28/03 04:23 PM To: web...@li... Subject: [Webmacro-devel] Minor whitespace issue? > > Guys I just noticed something funny in some HTML output from WM: <SELECT class="fieldentry" NAME="_dob_day"> <OPTION VALUE="- None-" > -None- <OPTION VALUE="1" > 1 <OPTION VALUE="2" > 2 <OPTION VALUE="3" > 3 <OPTION VALUE="4" > 4 <OPTION VALUE="5" > 5 <OPTION VALUE="6" > 6 <OPTION VALUE="7" > 7 <OPTION VALUE="8" > 8 <OPTION VALUE="9" > 9 <OPTION VALUE="10" > 10 <OPTION VALUE="11" > 11 <OPTION VALUE="12" > 12 <OPTION VALUE="13" > 13 <OPTION VALUE="14" > 14 <OPTION VALUE="15" > 15 <OPTION VALUE="16" > 16 <OPTION VALUE="17" > 17 <OPTION VALUE="18" > 18 <OPTION VALUE="19" > 19 <OPTION VALUE="20" > 20 <OPTION VALUE="21" > 21 <OPTION VALUE="22" > 22 <OPTION VALUE="23" > 23 <OPTION VALUE="24" > 24 <OPTION VALUE="25" > 25 <OPTION VALUE="26" SELECTED> 26 <OPTION VALUE="27" > 27 <OPTION VALUE="28" > 28 <OPTION VALUE="29" > 29 <OPTION VALUE="30" > 30 <OPTION VALUE="31" > 31 </SELECT> The bit that is "funny" is option 26. Why does it have an extra space? The code that proced it is: #macro intFieldChoice($action, $sch, $fieldValue, $showNoneItem) <SELECT class="choiceField" NAME="$OuterVars.Ignition.getFormFieldName($fieldValue.FormFieldName)"> #if ($showNoneItem) <OPTION> -Choose- #end #foreach $choice in $fieldValue.MetaData #if ($choice.Value == $fieldValue.Value) #set $isChecked = "SELECTED" #else #set $isChecked = "" #end <OPTION VALUE="$choice.Value" $isChecked> $choice.Label #end </SELECT> #showRequired( $fieldValue) #end ...and I can't see how an extra space gets in there just when the option is SELECTED. Does anybody else think that this might be an obscure whitespace issue? The only thing I can think of is that the line that assigns "SELECTED" is the first part of the #if clause. If people think this is not supposed to happen, then I will try to isolate it and add to the WS unit tests. |
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-28 20:47:48
|
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:37:59 -0400 (GMT), Keats <ke...@su...> wrote:
> I have to quibble with the method name getVariable(). We're not getting
> a Variable, we're getting an Object. More specifically we're getting an
> object that is deployed as a resource to the context. This may seem
> trivial, but I think this name could be a major source of confusion in
> the future (as some of our other names have been).
I see your point, but surely that's what we -are-actually doing. i.e. the
things that are in the Context are colloquially called "variables" (i.e.
template variables) and as such I think it makes sense.
> So maybe it should be:
>
> AutoContextLoader.getResource()
>
> or alternatively:
>
> getHelper()
> getPlugin()
> getValue()
> getObject()
> get()
> retrieve()
> getThingie()
> ...
>
> Since what can be returned is totally generic, it's hard to come up with
> a meaningful name. getResource() seems best to me, but any of the above
> would be better than getVariable.
getResource sounds too much like loading files/URLs IMO.
How about newContextVariable( name, context) ?
Marc
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
|
|
From: Keats <ke...@su...> - 2003-07-28 20:38:09
|
I have to quibble with the method name getVariable(). We're not getting a Variable, we're getting an Object. More specifically we're getting an object that is deployed as a resource to the context. This may seem trivial, but I think this name could be a major source of confusion in the future (as some of our other names have been). So maybe it should be: AutoContextLoader.getResource() or alternatively: getHelper() getPlugin() getValue() getObject() get() retrieve() getThingie() ... Since what can be returned is totally generic, it's hard to come up with a meaningful name. getResource() seems best to me, but any of the above would be better than getVariable. Keats |
|
From: Marc P. <ma...@an...> - 2003-07-28 20:26:54
|
Guys I just noticed something funny in some HTML output from WM:
<SELECT class="fieldentry" NAME="_dob_day"> <OPTION VALUE="-
None-" > -None-
<OPTION VALUE="1" > 1
<OPTION VALUE="2" > 2
<OPTION VALUE="3" > 3
<OPTION VALUE="4" > 4
<OPTION VALUE="5" > 5
<OPTION VALUE="6" > 6
<OPTION VALUE="7" > 7
<OPTION VALUE="8" > 8
<OPTION VALUE="9" > 9
<OPTION VALUE="10" > 10
<OPTION VALUE="11" > 11
<OPTION VALUE="12" > 12
<OPTION VALUE="13" > 13
<OPTION VALUE="14" > 14
<OPTION VALUE="15" > 15
<OPTION VALUE="16" > 16
<OPTION VALUE="17" > 17
<OPTION VALUE="18" > 18
<OPTION VALUE="19" > 19
<OPTION VALUE="20" > 20
<OPTION VALUE="21" > 21
<OPTION VALUE="22" > 22
<OPTION VALUE="23" > 23
<OPTION VALUE="24" > 24
<OPTION VALUE="25" > 25
<OPTION VALUE="26" SELECTED> 26
<OPTION VALUE="27" > 27
<OPTION VALUE="28" > 28
<OPTION VALUE="29" > 29
<OPTION VALUE="30" > 30
<OPTION VALUE="31" > 31
</SELECT>
The bit that is "funny" is option 26. Why does it have an extra space?
The code that proced it is:
#macro intFieldChoice($action, $sch, $fieldValue, $showNoneItem)
<SELECT class="choiceField"
NAME="$OuterVars.Ignition.getFormFieldName($fieldValue.FormFieldName)">
#if ($showNoneItem)
<OPTION> -Choose-
#end
#foreach $choice in $fieldValue.MetaData
#if ($choice.Value == $fieldValue.Value)
#set $isChecked = "SELECTED"
#else
#set $isChecked = ""
#end
<OPTION VALUE="$choice.Value" $isChecked> $choice.Label
#end
</SELECT>
#showRequired( $fieldValue)
#end
...and I can't see how an extra space gets in there just when the option is
SELECTED.
Does anybody else think that this might be an obscure whitespace issue?
The only thing I can think of is that the line that assigns "SELECTED" is
the first part of the #if clause.
If people think this is not supposed to happen, then I will try to isolate
it and add to the WS unit tests.
Marc
--
Marc Palmer
Contract Java Consultant/Developer
w a n g j a m m e r s
java and web software design
experts with an ethical outlook
http://www.wangjammers.org
|
237 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
