Nice! When we've discussed validation here previously (you may recall that I took @validate to bits, allowed it to be used in ways other than as a decorator and added JSON support) I mentioned that one of the prerequisites would be agreement on idiomatic usage. I do like to have available the "undecorated" style that allows for some logic flow when validation fails, and wouldn't miss the decorator at all if that went. This looks nice, and much more complete than my solution.
So will this (or something very much like it) get blessed as the way forward for Pyramid? And with JSON perhaps? Regards, Mike [email protected] http://twitter.com/asplake http://positiveincline.com On Jan 15, 1:42 pm, zeemonkee <[email protected]> wrote: > I've just released a small package, pyramid_simpleform: > > http://pypi.python.org/pypi/pyramid_simpleform/ > > This is a small helper library which wraps FormEncode. It's intended > to replace the old @validate decorator used in Pylons, but uses a > similar pattern to Django forms, WTForms or Flatland. > > The library includes a renderer helper class which uses webhelpers to > output HTML widgets, but you can render the form any way you like > (including htmlfill). > > Thanks to everyone on #pyramid and #pylons IRC for their help with all > my questions. -- 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.
