On Dec 5, 5:43 pm, "Mislav Marohnić" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The 2.0 -> 2.2 road has been VERY bumpy regarding the ActionView API, > especially internal ones. I'm not sure if what you subclassed is considered > a public or internal API. I remembered having fixed unit tests for Haml or > will_paginate ActionView integration many times.
Good point - I thought that the TemplateHandler stuff was considered public. If not, it should be, especially now that Josh has worked hard on making it nicer - I think being able to write your own custom "builder" is pretty compelling. > But now ActionView codebase is significantly cleaner, which shows all that > refactoring has paid off. The only question left to answer is: what defines > an API of a Rails component public or private? Having documentation? I might be wrong, but I didn't notice any :nodoc: labels anywhere in the template handler classes, just a lack of RDoc-style comments. I think explicitly using :nodoc: is a good way to indicate that it's internal, or at least "depend on this at your own risk." Jeff --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" 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/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
