cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Larson <>
Subject Re: [rant] please backport bugfixes to 2.1!
Date Wed, 03 Nov 2004 18:26:16 GMT
On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 07:05:49PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> Tim Larson wrote:
> >On Wed, Nov 03, 2004 at 06:29:46PM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >>Tim Larson wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Nov 02, 2004 at 11:29:28AM +0100, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> >>I had a bug while writing widget states because Repeater.RepeaterRow was 
> >>redefining getParent() while I was using this.parent. So I made it final 
> >>in order to be able to use this.parent throughout AbstractWidget.
> >
> >Ok, but I predict Marc will be unhappy ;)
> Why? Does he have special widgets that redefine getParent(). If that's 
> the case, we can remove the "final" and replace "this.parent" by 
> "getParent()".

Just the general rule of preventing the possibility of
making changes to things that should not be changed, such
as a RepeaterRow's parent, but maybe someone will find
a usecase to justify it :)

> Ok. Something that's seem more and more necessary to me is an "output" 
> state that would sit between "disabled" and "invisible", in order to 
> render widgets as text and not as disabled inputs without having to use 
> styling type="output".

Yes, lets start by adding that, and see where that gets us.

> You already told us about this idea, and it seems to me much more 
> general than CForms. However, I also understand that you may want to use 
> CForms as a playground for this experiment. But doing it in the main dev 
> line when we are trying to achieve stable state for CForms is IMO dangerous.
> So whiteboard/scratchpad seems a good idea. Remember: flowscript started 
> there ;-)

I have no problem with this, as long as it is ok with others
for me to clone cforms in the whiteboard for this purpose.

--Tim Larson

View raw message