[Seaside-dev] Re: [Seaside Commits] Seaside 3.0: Seaside-Tests-Functional-obi.101.mcz

[Gerhard Obermann]

Well I could use value: if i use something like:

value: anObject

   group isNil
         ifTrue: [ super value: anObject]
         ifFalse: [group hasCallback
                         ifTrue: [ self value: (group callbackValue:
anObject) ]
                         ifFalse: [ super value: anObject] ]

Gerhard

On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 4:13 PM, Lukas Renggli <renggli at gmail.com> wrote:

> I find #valueCallback: strange because on all other fields (select
> list, textInput, textArea, checkbox, ...) this is called #value:. I
> realize that there is a conflict with the #value: attribute and I
> don't have a better solution ;-)
>
> Lukas
>
> 2009/12/31 Gerhard Obermann <obi068 at gmail.com>:
> > With my latest commits the OLD API is now working as before.
> >
> > New API is still using with: (I don't like it too) , what should be used
> > instead.
> > I would also like to know if anyone suggest a better selector than
> > callbackValue:
> > (value: should not be used as Julian already suggested)
> >
> > Example:
> >     self
> >         renderLabel: 'Radiogroup'
> >         input: [
> >             html radioGroup
> >                 callback: [:value | radio := value];
> >                 with: [ :group |
> >                     self elements do: [ :each |
> >                         html label: [
> >                             group radioButton
> >                                 selected: radio = each;
> >                                 callbackValue: each.
> >                             html text: each ].
> >                         html break ] ] ]
> >         output: radio printString
> >         on: html
> >
> > Cheers
> > Gerhard
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Dec 31, 2009 at 12:31 PM, Philippe Marschall
> > <philippe.marschall at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> 2009/12/30 Lukas Renggli <renggli at gmail.com>:
> >> > I think this is a good improvement, but we have to be careful.
> >> > Behavior seems to be a bit distributed at the moment, for example the
> >> > callback is on the group but the selection is still on the individual
> >> > options?
> >> >
> >> > I would prefer if you'd continued in a separate branch before merging
> >> > everything. Also I'd like to hear the comments of Julian and Philippe,
> >> > they didn't reply yet and might have other ideas. Also there is a
> >> > certain risk with so deep changes that potentially break a lot of code
> >> > so close to beta ...
> >>
> >> We have been close to beta for about a year ;-)
> >>
> >> Sorry to be kinda party pooper here:
> >> - I really don't like a #with: that gives you something else than an
> html
> >> canvas
> >> - I would prefer it if you could keep the old API for compatibility,
> >> even if deprecated.
> >> - I certainly prefer if there is a convenience API that makes simple
> >> things simple as long as complex things are still possible. I.e. are
> >> we sure we never need a callback on a radio button?
> >>
> >> The for the rest I agree with Lukas and Julian.
> >>
> >> Cheers
> >> Philippe
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> seaside-dev mailing list
> >> seaside-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/seaside-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > seaside-dev mailing list
> > seaside-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/seaside-dev
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Lukas Renggli
> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
> _______________________________________________
> seaside-dev mailing list
> seaside-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/seaside-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/seaside-dev/attachments/20091231/55c8cc8f/attachment.htm