On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:35, Jerome Velociter <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello Denis,
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
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 ?
I don't know either :)
Should we open a discussion on that if none have been already ?
Caty, Sergiu ? Do we have a process defined for this ?
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.
Ok, I will adapt my implementation and the current code.
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 ?
We already have some JS best practices documented at http://dev.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Community/DevelopmentPractices#HJavaScri..., but it's probably about time we discuss again and expand those with new ones. In addition of try/catch discussion, I can think of code style, documentation style and preferred module pattern style. Jerome
Denis
-- Denis Gervalle SOFTEC sa - CEO eGuilde sarl - CTO _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs