generic/row.tt defaults to text if you don't specify what you need
2009-01-26 02620, 2009
brianfreud
yes, but anywhere make_widget is used, it's being used for text-based fields, not buttons, not checkboxes, only labels/inputs
2009-01-26 02631, 2009
aCiD2
that's a bit inconsistant
2009-01-26 02651, 2009
brianfreud
only time you actually used the [%- INCLUDE "forms/widget.tt" widget=form.field("artist_type") label="Type" -%] syntax in the templates I've edited so far
2009-01-26 02613, 2009
aCiD2
widget.tt will give you all sorts of field types
2009-01-26 02631, 2009
aCiD2
anyway, I think the new form system will better address your original concerns:
2009-01-26 02633, 2009
brianfreud
I know, but I mean, nothing I've worked on actually used that syntax for a non label/input
brianfreud: oh right, yea - I don't mind making it a macro, but I want to bring in the new forms *first* then lay macros over the top
2009-01-26 02613, 2009
aCiD2
rather than the other way round, if you get me
2009-01-26 02625, 2009
brianfreud
yes, I like those better - my point is, I think we can do it cleaner by keeping the macros now, rather than having to redo all that work again later.
2009-01-26 02627, 2009
aCiD2
so is it ok if I leave that out for now?
2009-01-26 02632, 2009
aCiD2
hrm
2009-01-26 02636, 2009
brianfreud
the interface won't likely change, only perhaps the macro's name
2009-01-26 02645, 2009
aCiD2
well, i think it will change
2009-01-26 02602, 2009
brianfreud
make_foo(id, text)?
2009-01-26 02603, 2009
aCiD2
the thing with macros is they are positional
2009-01-26 02615, 2009
aCiD2
whereas include is name based arguments
2009-01-26 02631, 2009
aCiD2
what this means is make_foo might need support for passing classes, or the field type
2009-01-26 02645, 2009
aCiD2
what if I want to make a field with a class, but no field type -- or the other way round?
2009-01-26 02616, 2009
brianfreud
ok; just a lot of work to convert all those, really would rather not have to do them all over again - exp including the l() enclosing for the text within them...
2009-01-26 02632, 2009
aCiD2 looks again
2009-01-26 02659, 2009
brianfreud
seems easier to me to adapt an extant macro, rather than re-convert them all over again when your bit changes
2009-01-26 02607, 2009
brianfreud
*s/seems/just seems
2009-01-26 02623, 2009
aCiD2
hmm
2009-01-26 02648, 2009
brianfreud
like I say, it's this difference, already, and a pita to selectively merge:
2009-01-26 02656, 2009
aCiD2
i'll merge it
2009-01-26 02603, 2009
brianfreud
original [%- INCLUDE "forms/widget.tt" widget=form.field("artist_type") label="Type" -%]
oh, make_widget = non required fields, make_required_widget = bolded required ones... totally a hack atm :P
2009-01-26 02657, 2009
aCiD2
widget.tt already works out what's required and not
2009-01-26 02603, 2009
brianfreud
it wasn't, though
2009-01-26 02608, 2009
aCiD2
we shouldn't be specifying what's required or not in the templates
2009-01-26 02614, 2009
brianfreud
???
2009-01-26 02636, 2009
aCiD2
that's a constraint at the code level
2009-01-26 02640, 2009
brianfreud
the templates *should* be defining the context, not the component-making templates...
2009-01-26 02646, 2009
aCiD2
[% field.required %]
2009-01-26 02602, 2009
brianfreud
here, try this (1sec)
2009-01-26 02658, 2009
aCiD2
make_input(label, field) should look at field and decide if it's required or not (by doing field.required) -- we specify what's required in the form itself
2009-01-26 02617, 2009
aCiD2
so there are no make_input_optional and make_input_required macros, just one
2009-01-26 02633, 2009
aCiD2
and please don't leave [%# TODO %] comments... esp. when they relate to Perl code, not that template
right, then that's a bug - but we shouldn't be hacking around it
2009-01-26 02630, 2009
brianfreud
ok
2009-01-26 02651, 2009
brianfreud
well, easy enough to change the required ones out. :)
2009-01-26 02659, 2009
aCiD2
sure
2009-01-26 02608, 2009
aCiD2
feel free to keep working and commiting etc :)
2009-01-26 02636, 2009
aCiD2
i'll let you know when to stop when I merge (because this merge will require you to reset the HEAD of your branch - more on that tomorrow)
2009-01-26 02642, 2009
brianfreud
np
2009-01-26 02607, 2009
aCiD2
glad we got a collaboration solution sorted though!
2009-01-26 02610, 2009
aCiD2
nn!
2009-01-26 02613, 2009
brianfreud
cya
2009-01-26 02652, 2009
Wizzcat dreads getting up in two hours :(
2009-01-26 02609, 2009
Wizzcat
nothing like an early-morning monday lecture
2009-01-26 02620, 2009
brianfreud
aCiD2: for when you read scrollback, actually, prob easier, unless you plan on messing with the templates in the next day or so, if you wait a couple of days; I'm working all evening Tues and all day Weds, so will be around to work on the rest of the templates tomorrow-Tues AM, let you have all Tues PM-Weds all day to merge
2009-01-26 02621, 2009
brianfreud
rather than us in a race condition tomorrow (unless, as I say, you plan to mess with templates, then np :P)
2009-01-26 02614, 2009
mikemorr
alastairp: great link. I like the Oasis and Van Halen ones the best.
I've been working on the template rewrites, to clean them up so js can much more easily tie in, and to better move towards separation of content, presentation, and function
2009-01-26 02612, 2009
brianfreud
working alphabetically, for the most part, though the /root subdir
2009-01-26 02630, 2009
ruaok
ok.
2009-01-26 02657, 2009
brianfreud
hoping to mostly have that wrapped up by end of week.
