Search Ideas
37 ideas match your query.:
Hiccdown should have support for ids and class names in the tag symbol. Like Hiccup.
[:'div#my-id.my-class.another-class']# => <div id="my-id" class="my-class another-class"></div>
It should also allow mixing:
[:'div#my-id.my-class.another-class', {id: 'override', class: 'additive'}]# => <div id="override" class="my-class another-class additive"></div>
In other words, the id from the hash would override the id from the symbol, and the class from the hash would be added to the classes from the symbol.
Hiccdown methods should live in their own, separate classes. How about they are called ‘displays’?
class ProductsDisplaydef index vc, # …vc.some_helper_methodendend
Behind the scenes, the Hiccdown gem would need to make the instance variables available to the display class:
display = @display_module.newview_context.instance_variables.each do |iv|display.instance_variable_set(iv,view_context.instance_variable_get(iv))end
Then:
class ProductsDisplaydef index vc, # …vc.some_helper_method(@products)endend
Hiccdown methods should live in Rails helpers as class methods. That way, the problem described in #302 is solved – methods can be referenced unambiguously:
ProductsHelper.indexStoresHelper.index
Hiccdown methods should live in Rails helpers as instance methods.
Could the errors around layouts be related to this?
It doesn’t really matter. This would be like calling a controller action from a helper method. Not something people do.
I think the thing I’m really fighting here is Rails being object-oriented. Which I can’t do anything about.
Not sure the Rails team realizes how much OOP reduces the extensibility of Rails.
I think the thing I’m really fighting here is Rails being object-oriented. Which I can’t do anything about.
Not sure the Rails team realizes how much OOP reduces the extensibility of Rails.
Having explored three different ideas, I believe #302 – having regular helper methods to render Hiccdown structures – is the best.
The idea is not without its flaws, but having to qualify a method name by, say, calling it idea_form instead of form is still better than manually having to pass the view context around all the time and not being able to trivially access instance variables.
So I’ll stick with #302 for now, which is the status quo already.
#327 applies here, too: no access to instance variables inside helper class methods.
Hiccdown methods should live in their own, separate classes. How about they are called ‘displays’?
class ProductsDisplaydef index vc, # …vc.some_helper_methodendend
Behind the scenes, the Hiccdown gem would need to make the instance variables available to the display class:
display = @display_module.newview_context.instance_variables.each do |iv|display.instance_variable_set(iv,view_context.instance_variable_get(iv))end
Then:
class ProductsDisplaydef index vc, # …vc.some_helper_method(@products)endend
They are: vc.instance_variable_get(:@foo)
Instance variables are not available inside the methods.
I’m trying this now. Having to prepend every invocation of a helper method with vc. is getting really old really fast.
Hiccdown methods should live in their own, separate modules. How about they are called ‘displays’?
module ProductsDisplaydef self.index vc, # …vc.some_helper_methodendend
A benefit of this approach is that, when people start a new Rails app, they may end up putting whatever they’d otherwise put in a helper in a display, since displays have the benefit of having unambiguously resolvable method names.
Tested, it works. self does indeed point to the view_context in the helper. Verified by printing object_ids.
I don’t like the term ‘renderer’ yet. It’s too loaded with meaning, what with Rails already having a render method in controllers and another render method in views…
Then how would you call index from a helper method?
Hiccdown methods should live in their own, separate modules. How about they are called ‘renderers’?
module ProductsRendererdef self.index vc, # …vc.some_helper_methodendend
A benefit of this approach is that, when people start a new Rails app, they may end up putting whatever they’d otherwise put in a helper in a renderer, since renderers have the benefit of having unambiguously resolvable method names.
I don’t think that’s something people would do a lot, but they still easily could: ProductsRenderer.index(self)