On Nov 17, 2007 5:33 PM, David King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I think that the best solution is to add a new return value, e.g.
> > {meta, Val}, to controller functions. ErlyWeb will accumulate those
> > values in a list and pass it to the 'phased' Fun as an extra
> > parameter. So, you could write
> > {phased, {ewc, A},
> > fun(ExpandedEwc, MetaVals, Rendered) ->
> > {ewc, html_container, [A, MetaVals, Rendered]}
> > end}.
> > This would simplify setting the Title, Header, etc from the
> > controllers without using Bryan's clever ErlTL tricks (which may be
> > less-than-intuitive for some people :) ), add too much magic to the
> > framework, or even changing it much. It would also work trivially even
> > when subcomponents are rendered in parallel because this is
> > effectively a side-effect-free accumulator.
>
> That sounds good, and it avoids breaking backwards compatibility as
> well. I do agree about changes to yaws_arg being a bad idea (although
> it is currently possible for programs to change it before passing it
> to children, that would be to be deliberate).
>
> The only problem I see is that if my controller function returns:
>
> [{add_property,{title,"The Title!"}},
> {data,"foo"}]
>
> Then what does my view function look like? These could both make sense:
>
> <%@ fun([_,Data]) %> <!-- pass it through -->
>
> <%@ fun([Data]) %> <!-- pretend it didn't exist -->
>
> I wouldn't mind passing it through, but that does seem a bit strange
> for children to be getting data intended for parents. Pretending it
> didn't exist seems even stranger.
>
I don't think that the view function should receive the meta Vals. The
purpose of the {meta, Val} feature is to pass values "up" to the
'phased' Fun. If you need to pass the same value to the view function
(and I can't really think of a scenario where you would), you can add
it again as a {data, Data} tuple. Maybe to make things clearer,
instead of adding {meta, Val} values to the list you return from a
controller function, you would return a tuple such as
show(A) ->
...
{meta, [Val1, Val2], [{data, Data}, {ewc, ..}... ]}.
The elements of the second tuple element would be accumulated and
eventually passed to the 'phased' fun, and the third element would be
treated as the response value is treated today.
What do you think?
Yariv
>
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> I really like the component system, so I'd definitely like to get
> >> your feedback on my ideas since it's already going in a good
> >> direction.
> >>
> >> I wouldn't expect the siblings to be guaranteed to receive it (since
> >> clearly you can't guarantee that they all do, since some may have
> >> already been evaluated, or may be being evaluated at the same time),
> >> but I wouldn't expect them to be guaranteed to *not* receive it.
> >>
> >> Since the yaws_arg is being re-vamped anyway, maybe this should be
> >> carried around on the yaws_arg. A simple plist is probably fine for
> >> it. Then as the yaws_arg is returned changed it can be passed through
> >> changed. Then make all subcomponents pass the yaws_arg implicitly: so
> >> instead of {ewc,controller,func,[A,Foo]} calling func(A,Foo), make
> >> {ewc,controller,func,[Foo]]} call fun(A,Foo). That way you're not
> >> passing a stale yaws_arg accidentally. This is of course a backwards-
> >> breaking change, but not a difficult one to fix, since all of the
> >> erlyweb code that I've seen and written passes it to the sub-
> >> components anyway (even if it's not necessarily used).
> >>
> >> Otherwise, you end up all of the components doing something like
> >> this:
> >>
> >> show(A,Foo)
> >> NewA=yaws_arg:add_meta(A,[{title,get_the_title()}]),
> >>
> >> {return_with_meta,[{ewc,func,[NewA,Foo]}],
> >> NewA}.
> >>
> >> (once again, with better names than return_with_meta and add_meta)
> >> The worry here is that the subcomponents have to be called with NewA
> >> instead of A, which seems ripe for forgetting to me (especially if
> >> the yaws_arg some some validation before it passes it on; you could
> >> pass invalid data to sub-components this way).
> >>
> >> I haven't looked at the contents of the yaws_arg, but if it's tagged
> >> with a type, then you could just do this:
> >>
> >> show(A,Foo)
> >> [_New_yaws_arg=yaws_arg:add_property(A,[{title,get_the_title()}]),
> >> {ewc,func,[Foo]}].
> >>
> >> Since erlyweb already knows to check the returned list for {ewc} and
> >> whatnot, it could just check for a new yaws_arg and start using that
> >> one. The problem there is that it forces {ewc}s to be processed
> >> serially (since what do you do when you get two conflicting
> >> yaws_args?), which my erlyweb does not (and given your blog post on a
> >> potential {concurrent,[{ewc,...}]}, I suspect this won't be a
> >> guarantee forever). Another idea is to just add another return value
> >> from controller functions:
> >>
> >> show(A,Foo)
> >> [{add_property,{title,get_the_title()}},
> >> {add_property,{time_to_live,two_weeks()}}
> >> {ewc,controller,func,[Foo]},
> >> {ewc,controller,fun2,[yaws_arg:get_property(cookies)]].
> >>
> >> (this was has my implicit-passing of yaws_args, but it's not
> >> necessary; not doing so does preclude children retrieving properties
> >> from parents, but if they need that they should pass it as an
> >> argument anyway). That doesn't carry the assumption that they are
> >> processed serially. It prevents parents from getting to children's
> >> properties without using {phased,Ewcs,...}, but that's probably not a
> >> problem, and isn't very avoidable. (I think all of these options do,
> >> if they want to do post-processing of any kind).
> >>
> >> Personally, I like the last option, but it looks like it would
> >> require quite a few changes to the way that the erlyweb:ewc/N
> >> functions work
> >>
> >> Any other ideas? How does that last one look?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>>> Btw, just curious, what parts of ErlyWeb are you rewriting?
> >>>> [...]
> >>>> Mostly large swaths of erlydb and erlydb_mnesia (in ways that
> >>>> make it
> >>>> work better with mnesia, but that make it incompatible with other
> >>>> DBMSs, which of course the current incarnation avoids). I may
> >>>> end up
> >>>> having to revert this if mnesia can't handle millions of objects,
> >>>> with which it seems to be having trouble once they start to become
> >>>> larger objects than simple tuples. I've hacked in a few return and
> >>>> 'EXIT' handlers from controller functions for special
> >>>> circumstances,
> >>>> like when I want to return a 400- or 500-level HTTP response along
> >>>> with other information. I might try to hack in some WebDAV handling
> >>>> stuff, as I'm considering writing a desktop client for my app in
> >>>> the
> >>>> future and that seems the easiest way to get the data to and
> >>>> from the
> >>>> desktop client. I haven't decided what that's going to look like
> >>>> yet.
> >>>> It looks like I may be hacking in a return value to return extended
> >>>> information to parent controller functions, like <title> tags.
> >>>> but I
> >>>> want to decide how it should work, first. It sounds like it's just
> >>>> not a concern to the two biggest users of erlyweb
> >>>
> >>> If you want to contribute this feature (or any other feature that
> >>> you
> >>> think will be useful to other ErlyWeb users) I'll be happy to accept
> >>> your code.
> >>>
> >>> Yariv
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yariv
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Nov 16, 2007 10:19 AM, David King <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> erlyweb uses a component system for rendering pages. It makes
> >>>>>> most of
> >>>>>> my controller functions return lists like this:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> [{data,post:title(Post)},
> >>>>>> {ewc,post,contents,[A,Post]},
> >>>>>> {ewc,comment,comments,[A,post:comments(Post)]}]
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The view function then looks like:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> <%@ show([Title,Contents,Comments]) %>
> >>>>>> <h1><% Title %></h1>
> >>>>>> <div class="post_contents"><% Contents %></div>
> >>>>>> <ul class="comments><% Comments %></ul>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I really like this, because it allows me to separate the view-
> >>>>>> logic
> >>>>>> for things like contents and comments out from each other, which
> >>>>>> makes changing the behaviour of these quite simple, localised,
> >>>>>> and
> >>>>>> re-
> >>>>>> useable. (In fact, as I re-write portions of erlyweb for my
> >>>>>> purposes,
> >>>>>> the component system is something that I haven't touched at all
> >>>>>> because it works quite well.) However, it has an inherent
> >>>>>> limitation:
> >>>>>> none of those functions can return data to be rendered outside of
> >>>>>> their components. In my case, I'd like to be able to set <title>
> >>>>>> tags, which means that the top-level controller function (by top-
> >>>>>> level, I mean the one referenced in the URL; like in /post/
> >>>>>> show/12,
> >>>>>> the top-level controller function would be show/2) needs to
> >>>>>> somehow
> >>>>>> return information to be rendered outside its little sandbox.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I see that Vimagi doesn't set <title> tags (neither <http://
> >>>>>> vimagi.com/p/0PXmMRe6hGV> nor <http://vimagi.com/users/
> >>>>>> feeling3_4>
> >>>>>> set one, at least, and those are where I'd expect to see
> >>>>>> them), but
> >>>>>> BeerRiot does (<http://beerriot.com/beer/view/1751>; BTW I do
> >>>>>> love
> >>>>>> the idea of having a controller called "beer_controller").
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> It isn't limited to <title>s (for instance, I may want to
> >>>>>> alert the
> >>>>>> browser that an RSS equivalent of this page exists, or what the
> >>>>>> caching TTL is for this page in the HTTP headers). Conceptually,
> >>>>>> how
> >>>>>> would one go about returning this extra information, while still
> >>>>>> using the component system (I now have a lot of code that uses it
> >>>>>> that I'd like to not re-write :) )?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"erlyweb" group.
To post to this group, send email to erlyweb@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/erlyweb?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---