"sit there and write a module for each one"?
You mean, type 'MyApp::Controllers::'? You could make it simpler by adding a C
= MyApp::Controllers line before your controller requires, then you could write
'class C::Whatever < R('/url')' sort of stuff.
I really don't like the magic of set :view
Sure, but say that you want to have lots and lots of controllers, I don't
think anyone wants to sit there and write a module for each one to be
honest.
And with that way of thinking we shouldn't even be able to set :views. We
would have to write a module App::Views for every view.
set :views is ma
The regular way of doing this with requires is simply that your 'controller'
files look like this:
module MyApp::Controllers
class PonyX
def get id
.. logic to look up pony with id ..
end
end
end
This can even be generalized further I expect, to
class MyApp::Controllers::P
What I am doing now is basically the same as requiring. If I do require
with all the files, they don't become a part of the controllers module.
The problem is that having to require (or in my case 'add') ever
controller is *not* a very good way to work. It would be much better to be
able to just d
I don't have time to look thru now, but it doesn't seem to support
boolean attributes (e.g. `input checked:true` should render )? I was very much missing this feature in old
Markaby, and finally even wrote a patch, as you might remember[1].
It'd probably be quite easy to add, and after all it was
I don't think I understand the problem - can't you just `require` all
the files with controllers?
-- Matma Rex
___
Camping-list mailing list
Camping-list@rubyforge.org
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/camping-list
https://github.com/camping/camping/pull/50
Right now it's completely inline in camping/mab.rb, but it should be
fairy easy to create another Rubygem where we could implement for
advanced features (indentation, AJAX-stuff, whatever).
// Magnus Holm
___
C
Hey,
a few days ago I was having a hard time splitting up my controllers in to
different folders.
With views you can just do:
set :views, *path*
in the module App
I think it would be nice if we could do the same thing for controllers,
models and helpers and whatever.
like:
set :controllers, *path
Rumble seems like a good start.
So what else would need to be done?
On 12/18/2011 1:27 AM, Magnus Holm wrote:
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 02:47, Steve Klabnik wrote:
A wild project appears: http://krainboltgreene.github.com/dapper-dan/
Some problems:
* It doesn't support CSS proxy (div.wrapper!
Jenna Fox writes:
> the same way linux apps interface with an X11 server today.
Hey, we've been there, 15 years ago:
http://ftp.x.org/pub/X11R6.8.2/doc/libxrx.1.html
--
Christian Neukirchenhttp://chneukirchen.org
___
Camping-list mailing list
Cam
You can't really write Javascript in Ruby due to the way it (and its
libraries like jQuery) handle functions. Sure, it could be done, but
the code would be ugly.
2011/12/18, Isak Andersson :
> Not really sure to be honest.
> It looks very nice and is basically markaby.
>
> But I think we should ei
Not really sure to be honest.
It looks very nice and is basically markaby.
But I think we should either create our own, or fork it so we could have our
own cool stuff, like the AJAX things someone mentioned.
Also, it would be cool if you could also write JS in ruby easily with camping
out of th
Aw..
That is rather disappointing. But still, I see this problem as a chance to be
reborn anew. Fresh and clean of the bad lessons learnt by Markaby. We did learn
some lessons, didn't we?
—
Jenna Fox
On Sunday, 18 December 2011 at 7:27 PM, Magnus Holm wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 02
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 02:47, Steve Klabnik wrote:
> A wild project appears: http://krainboltgreene.github.com/dapper-dan/
Some problems:
* It doesn't support CSS proxy (div.wrapper! { … ] == div(:id =>
'wrapper') { … })
* It doesn't escape stuff
* It doesn't specify its dependencies correctly
14 matches
Mail list logo
