22 Apr
2010
22 Apr
'10
9:29 a.m.
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:35, Jerome Velociter <jerome(a)xwiki.com> wrote:
Ok, I will adapt my implementation and the current code.
Hello Denis,
Well, since I have not followed what have been discuss regarding the color
theme, what would be the process to add a new color in it ? How do we expect
to manage the evolution of the color theme to avoid it to became cluttered ?
Should we open a discussion on that if none have been already ?
Hi devs,
We have a customer request for highlighting the filters that are
currently
applied on a livetable. The rationale of this, is
that sometimes the
filtered table is empty or unexpected by the user, but he does not notice
that a filter is currently applied. We have written a proposed
implementation as well and you may also see what it looks like in the
attached screenshot, for both text field and select box (for webkit).
Currently, I choose yto use the "background highlight color" of the
active
color theme, but my feeling is that adding
another highlight color would
be
better.
I agree
I have also hook to events separately from the "main" refresh handler,
because I do not understand the implementation of this handler. Why using
an
intermediate makeRefreshHandler, and why it does not properly provide the
currently changed filter to the handler ? Could or should I change that ?
Yes you can. The refresh handler should probably not return a function but
be a livetable function that is bound as event listener, i.e :
this.handleRefresh.bindAsEventListener(this)
versus the current
this.makeRefreshHandler(this)
This way you will be able to access the event from the handler, thus the
filter that triggered it.
One last thing : you should not need the try {} catch
{} statements in
your code. I don't see where it could fail (and if it could, I think it's
better to try to fix it so that it does not happen). Try catch blocks IMO
should be used only in very specific occasions (for example when you know
code can fail under certain circumstances, but you don't want to stop the
execution). Anyway that's just my opinion, we've never stated on this as a
best practice, but we can discuss it in another thread if needed. I'd be
curious to get input from Sergiu about this for example.
I agree. My habits was that minor JS function (those that do not impact
usability) should never ever crash, so I usually protect them with try/catch
in all cases. This is maybe overkill here. Should we also open a discusion
on this best practice ? Sergiu ?
Denis
--
Denis Gervalle
SOFTEC sa - CEO
eGuilde sarl - CTO