I would like to keep with the interface of ActionView as much as possible, even when it's not public. This is important for keeping compatibility with Rails helpers.
Tom, since we're assigning locals as actual locals, I imagine we can't do anything quite as simple as Steve's suggestion. Can you think of an easier way to do this than dynamically defining a method? - Nathan Tom Bagby wrote: > They do have the same function and are both implementation details. > The only reference to it I see in the ActionView documentation that is > not in a protected method for dealing with template compiled methods > is this: > > <quote> > If you need to find out whether a certain local variable has been > assigned a value in a particular render call, you need to use the > following pattern: > > <% if local_assigns.has_key? :headline %> > Headline: <%= headline %> > <% end %> > > Testing using defined? headline will not work. This is an > implementation restriction. > </quote> > > I am pretty sure this isn't true. I've tested using defined? in an > rhtml template and it worked fine for me. They are implemented as > normal local variables now so I don't see why you would need this. > ActionView in the semi-recent past was defining methods to simulate > local variables (as was Haml), possibly this was a work around. > > Anyway, might be nice to change purely for consistency, but it's not > part of the public interface of ActionView. ActionView documentation > should probably be updated to remove that unnecessary pattern. > > -Tom > > > On Jul 23, 11:21 am, Mike Ferrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> My esteemed colleague Jeff Hardy has pointed out that the local >> variable _haml_local_assigns inside a Haml template contains the same >> information as the local_assigns hash local variable that is available >> in an erb template. This seems like an inconsistency with the template >> interface that Rails developers expect to have, as the >> ActionView::Base documentation refers to the local_assigns hash >> explicitly. >> >> Thoughts anyone? >> >> Mike >> >> On Jul 22, 7:09 pm, Mike Ferrier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> I was trying to figure out why I had no local_assigns hash to look at >>> from within a Haml partial rendered with a :locals hash; I renamed it >>> to .rhtml and ran it again and local_assigns had magically appeared. >>> >>> Anyone ran into this before? Is there any way to get at the >>> local_assigns hash from inside a Haml template? >>> > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
