Re: Anybody available to test patches for jinja2 template?

Hi Christof,

Did you ever respond to my thoughts on the need for html_kwargs vs
**kwargs? If so I never saw it and this patch is stalled as a result.

I would like to get the results of your work applied into the next
pre-2.0.0 release.

Thoughts?

thx. -- rouilj

In message <[email protected]>,
"John P. Rouillard" writes:
>Hi Christof:
>
>Thanks for taking the time to work on this.
>
>In message <[email protected]>,
>Christof Meerwald writes:
>>On Mon, 20 May 2019 19:19:57 -0400, John P. Rouillard wrote:
>>> I would like to get these patches in place as they upgrade to
>>> bootstrap4 and do some other additions.
>>
>>I guess the main question for the other additions is if adding a
>>"html_kwargs={}" parameter to the "submit" methods is the right thing
>>to do - or if it would be better adding that as "**kwargs" parameter.
>>
>>"classhelp" and "menu" currently have "html_kwargs" parameters, but
>>"renderWith", "field", "multiline" have "**kwargs" parameters. I think
>>my preference would be to have "**kwargs" parameter as "submit" seems
>>pretty similar to "multiline" as it maps fairly directly to an HTML
>>"input" tag (similar to "multiline").
>
>I think I expanded the use of html_kwargs in the core with some of my
>patches. I think I may have tried passing class as an argument to and
>I think I had issues doing:
>
>   some_python_func(arg1, arg2, namedarg1=a, class="collapsible")
>
>at some point. So I added:
>
>   some_python_func(arg1, arg2, namedarg1=a,
>        html_kwargs={"class": "collapsible"})
>
>(well you get the idea). The only thing that concerns me is that a
>**kwargs may conflict with a named parameter in a future release of
>roundup. Also if this code used only in core roundup, I would be less
>concerned but code like:
>
>          <span tal:condition="not:InBatchUpdate"
>                tal:content="structure
>                             python:context.keyword.menu(size=30,
>                             html_kwargs={'id':
>                             'keyword', 'data-placeholder' : 'Select Topics',
>                             'class': 'multiselect' }) or
>                             default"
>                >None</span>
>
>can be put in a tracker template. Because of that I think it is
>safer/more future proof to use html_kwargs rather than **kwargs.  (I
>think **kwargs looks cleaner than the dict passed to html_kwargs
>but...)
>
>Does my concern/explanation make sense?
>
>Also does this concern mean that we should also be supporting
>html_kwargs where we currently support **kwargs? If we do we would
>support backward compatibility for **kwargs if html_kwargs is not set.
>
>>BTW, I have cleaned up whitespace changes and indentation for the
>>template changes at
>>https://bitbucket.org/cmeerw/roundup/commits/8b0f049af488becd1f18ff70dab23b9f23dd2557?at=jinja2-bootstrap
>
>That looks much cleaner than what I was seeing.
>
>Nice job.
--
				-- rouilj
John Rouillard
===========================================================================
My employers don't acknowledge my existence much less my opinions.