>
> That's always awkward. A lot of the time one can use alert(), but it
> doesn't always play well with asynchronous code. Logging to the DOM with
> something like this can be useful:
>
> document.body.appendChild(document.createTextNode("My message------"))
>
Hello Jeremy.
Thank you very much. I'll try that out.
>
> The syncer is calling deleteTiddler() expecting that it will at some point
> invoke the callback, with either success or failure. If the deleteTiddler
> method just exits, without calling the callback, the syncer will never get
> the chance to kick off the next sync task. I'd suggest first adding logging
> so you can tell whether the method is being called. If necessary, you could
> mock the function by just calling the callback with the success parameters.
>
>
I updated the deleteTiddler function, first with a dummy definition and it
started to work. But as a side effect the draft tiddlers remained there. I
modified the code to do real deletion of tiddlers and it is working
perfectly right now. I updated the gist. I have single tiddler files!!
hooray! Now the loading part is missing.
What would be the better way to provide skinny tiddlers? Does it makes
sense at all? Because I have to read the whole file in order to give the
skinny definition there is no advantage of using just a skeleton tiddlers.
I worked before with loading tiddlers from the FS and it was a total
disaster. Any advice will be very welcome.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TiddlyWikiDev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/b1aac4ea-4d42-4adc-a0b3-5605db4f849f%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
