I am not so sure why everyone seems to be so unhappy with FormEncode.  I
find it a rather brilliant solution.  There is definitely a steeper than
average learning curve but like all things that are powerful and can be
adapted to any situation, there is always a tradeoff.  I would hate to see
support for FormEncode lost in Pylons.  I currently use @validate with
custom validators and formatters with htmlfill with great success.  I think
it would be a great loss to move to some simpler solution that is not as
powerful.  The reason I chose Pylons is for its power to adapt, otherwise, I
would have gone with Django - less learning curve but less adaptable.  If
there is going to be support added for an alternative form processing
framework on top of FormEncode then that is great but I would hate to see
FormEncode dropped.  I know that I could always continue using FormEncode
because Pylons is flexible but maintaining @validate on my own is not the
ultimate situation.

Cheers

2009/10/4 DavidG <[email protected]>

>
> Does either Django forms or WTForms support chained validators a la
> FormEncode? I find this a very useful feature.
>
> Both solutions look really nice - I wonder what the advantages/
> disadvantages to using WTForms are, compared to FormEncode/htmlfill? I
> never had much luck with @validate, so handling the details of form
> logic has always been a bear with the current patterns.
>
> David
>
> On Oct 3, 5:50 am, Dan <[email protected]> wrote:
> > There seems to be a basic set of validators for integers, email,
> > dates, etc. However writing custom validators is very simple (compared
> > to FormEncode) and it should be easy to "fill in the gaps" with
> > additional validators, which could be added to the Pylons core or
> > submitted to WTForms.
> >
> > On Oct 3, 5:23 am, Mike Orr <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 2, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Dan <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > WTForms does this already:http://wtforms.simplecodes.com/
> >
> > > > It uses the same pattern as Django forms, and might be a bit further
> > > > developed.
> >
> > > That looks pretty elegant. It would obviate FormEncode, htmlfill, and
> > > the form helpers, it looks like.  Are the validators complete?  Not
> > > that FormEncode's validators are easy to use in their semi-documented
> > > state.
> >
> > > Can you use the validators alone without the form?  I use a FormEncode
> > > schema to validate the INI file in environment.py, so that I can make
> > > all exceptions happen at the beginning rather than in unexpected
> > > requests.
> >
> > > If you can make a Pylons tutorial for it, we can consider documenting
> > > it in the next version of Pylons.
> >
> > > --
> > > Mike Orr <[email protected]>
> >
> >
> >
>


-- 
Never take life seriously. Nobody gets out alive anyway.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to