[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-16 Thread John Heenan
No reaction to including a four line big productivity booster into web2py! If not an enhanced BEAUTIFY class why not another BEAUTIFY class such as BEAUTIFY2? Surely at least an answer is merited, even if the answer is no! Below is a copy of http://www.web2pyslices.com/main/slices/take_slice/58

[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-16 Thread villas
On Feb 17, 12:07 am, John Heenan wrote: > No reaction to including a four line big productivity booster into > web2py! Hi John, Sorry no one commented! At least I looked at it, and liked it. But Beautify is only a prototyping & testing thing for most so it's making something prettier that no on

[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-16 Thread John Heenan
True. But surely better organised or prettier prototypes are preferable when prototyping, as they gives a more realistic idea of a final desired layout before the prettifiers get called in! You can see the effect using just BEAUTIFY at http://www.zgus.com/zgus/products/category_item/1 I don't ha

[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-16 Thread mdipierro
Sorry I did not comment. I think this this can be very useful but it should not be a replacement for the current beautify. I think it is important to leave the keys unchanged for debugging purposes. That is what most people use BEAUTIFY for. You should post a slice about the improved function and

[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-17 Thread John Heenan
The code I posted does not replace the normal behaviour of BEAUTIFY. There is choice. In the four line example code I posted (which is from a web2py slice) the keys are only changed if the second character is an underscore. I accept there is little enthusiasm. It is ironic because I think there is

[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-17 Thread John Heenan
Thanks for your comments Thadeus. As mentioned to Massimo, the normal behaviour of BEAUTIFY is not altered by the sample code. John Heenan On Feb 17, 1:08 pm, Thadeus Burgess wrote: > I will say this, it is alot better, because you can hardly even tell > it is a prototyping table, it could in ce

[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-17 Thread mdipierro
Let me take a second look... On Feb 17, 5:53 am, John Heenan wrote: > Thanks for your comments Thadeus. As mentioned to Massimo, the normal > behaviour of BEAUTIFY is not altered by the sample code. > > John Heenan > > On Feb 17, 1:08 pm, Thadeus Burgess wrote: > > > I will say this, it is alot

[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-17 Thread mdipierro
I looked again. You try to achieve two things: 1) As you say if the key starts with a_, this is removed. This is a trick to make sure elements are sorted as you like them. 2) You capitalize the words and replace _ with spaces. I think these are wrong solution to the problem. Look into trunk. The

[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-17 Thread John Heenan
Thanks Massimo The keyfilter example you provided does not work but this one does with the current BEAUTIFY in the trunk keyfilter=lambda key=' '.join([x.capitalize() for x in key[2:].split('_')]) if key[1]=='_' else key A typical view file is now {{extend 'layout.html'}} {{=BEAUTIFY(response._v

[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-18 Thread John Heenan
This is a better keyfilter for the new BEAUTIFY than the one I provided as it allows a key to be an empty string. keyfilter=lambda key=' '.join([x.capitalize() for x in key[2:].split('_')]) if key[1:2]=='_' else key I have updated a web2py slice with information about using the new BEAUTIFY at ht

[web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-18 Thread mdipierro
Thank you John. On Feb 18, 2:12 am, John Heenan wrote: > This is a better keyfilter for the new BEAUTIFY than the one I > provided as it allows a key to be an empty string. > > keyfilter=lambda key=' '.join([x.capitalize() for x in > key[2:].split('_')]) if key[1:2]=='_' else key > > I have updat

Re: [web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-16 Thread Thadeus Burgess
I am sorry that I did not comment as well. I took a look when you originally posted, and I like it. I didn't comment because I do not use BEAUTIFY. I really do like the recursive, +1 for me, but only as another option to the current beautify not a replacement. -Thadeus On Tue, Feb 16, 2010

Re: [web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-16 Thread Thadeus Burgess
I will say this, it is alot better, because you can hardly even tell it is a prototyping table, it could in certain situations pass for production quality :) -Thadeus On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Thadeus Burgess wrote: > I am sorry that I did not comment as well. > > I took a look when y

Re: [web2py] Re: An enhanced BEAUTIFY class

2010-02-17 Thread Jonathan Lundell
On Feb 17, 2010, at 3:49 AM, John Heenan wrote: > The code I posted does not replace the normal behaviour of BEAUTIFY. > There is choice. In the four line example code I posted (which is from > a web2py slice) the keys are only changed if the second character is > an underscore. > > I accept ther