Should we have a JSON helper (same as you JD)?
On Jul 24, 1:15 pm, Michael Ellis <michael.f.el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Something good has come out of this: while looking for a workaround I
> learned about simplejson.dumps(). So now I've defined my own little helper
> JD()
>
> import simplejson
> def JD(obj):
> return XML(simplejson.dumps(obj,indent=4))
>
> In my view (or controller) I can lump into one variable everything I'm going
> to need to pass into my js at render time, e.g.
>
> PT = dict(
> updatenow=False,
> schartoptions = dict(
> type ='bar',
> barColor ='green',
> chartRangeMin = chartmin,
> chartRangeMax = chartmax,
> )
> ## add more objects here ...
> )
>
> then put a single line at the top of my js script and reference everything
> as part of that namespace, e.g.
> <script type="text/javascript">
> ...
> var PT = {{=JD(PT)}};
> ...
>
> $(#something).sparkline( ..., PT.schartoptions);
> ...
> </script>
>
> The JD(PT) expands to a nicely indented js declaration, e.g.
>
> var PT = {
> "updatenow": false,
> "schartoptions": {
> "chartRangeMin": 0,
> "barColor": "green",
> "type": "bar",
> "chartRangeMax": 1
> }
>
> };
>
> What's also cool is that if all or part of that declaration corresponds to
> data coming in from a getJSON() loop after the page is loaded, then
> everything's already defined and initialized.
>
> This feels like a definite improvement over what I was doing before. Far
> less clutter and definitely DRY'er.
>
> Cheers,
> Mike
>
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 9:34 AM, Phyo Arkar <phyo.arkarl...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > I am also doing more and more in JS for views. Even search engine for
> > tables, i am using JQGrid's local search (at latest version if JQGrid).It
> > dont need server side at all for search to work, which make it a lot faster
> > + lesser hit on server performance.
>
> > On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 7:53 PM, Michael Ellis
> > <michael.f.el...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> My bad. It does work. In my earlier attempt to use it I forgot that a
> >> for loop variable isn't an object reference when looping over a list of
> >> strings. So the value of schartoptions wasn't being altered at all, just
> >> the loop variable.
>
> >> I'm still in favor of an alternate operator, though. As it is now, I've
> >> moved all my chart options inside the script tag e.g.
>
> >> var schartoptions = {
> >> type: 'bar',
> >> barColor: 'green',
> >> chartRangeMin: '{{=chartmin}}',
> >> chartRangeMax: '{{=chartmax}}'
> >> };
>
> >> and substitute only the things that have to be determined at run time
> >> rather than clutter up my expressions by wrapping them in XML().
>
> >> I'd much rather code in python than js, but I'm beginning to feel that
> >> using more js and less python in views makes a lot of sense.
>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Mike
>
> >> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 8:40 AM, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu>wrote:
>
> >>> I am confused:
> >>> Does this now work?
>
> >>> {{
> >>> schartoptions = """{
> >>> type: 'bar',
> >>> barColor: 'green',
> >>> chartRangeMin: '%d',
> >>> chartRangeMax: '%d'
> >>> }
> >>> """%(chartmin,chartmax)
>
> >>> }}
>
> >>> and later on I use the variables within a script tag, e.g.
>
> >>> <script type="text/javascript">
> >>> /* <
