fluid-tech IRC Logs-2012-09-06

[15:15:00 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Bosmon, are you there?

[15:28:06 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> anastasiac - hi there

[15:28:24 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> hey, Bosmon, I have a question about the deferredCall expander

[15:28:35 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Ah, that!

[15:28:40 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> I was just surveying it this weekend

[15:28:53 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Wondering whether it should be abolished

[15:29:08 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> if the function requires the use of one of the components in the tree (within scope), do I have to make sure that the component has already been instantiated?

[15:29:21 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> I'm having a problem with it

[15:29:33 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Yes

[15:29:44 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> It would be best not to use it

[15:29:50 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> at all?

[15:29:51 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> But yes, you will have that issue

[15:30:00 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> It is called "extremely early" during instantiation

[15:30:08 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> do you have a suggestion for an alternative?

[15:30:13 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> And it is most likely that any components it tries to make use of will not exist

[15:30:25 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> It depends on what effect you are trying to achieve (smile)

[15:30:39 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> right. It creates the component, no problem, but then the component gets created again at the time it would have been

[15:31:21 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> so I'm trying to set the 'aria-controls' attribute on the videoPlayer language menus

[15:31:34 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> this attribute needs to reference the id of the transcript area

[15:31:50 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> the language menus and the transcript area are governed by independent components

[15:32:16 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> so I need to find a way to get the id from the one component's DOM chunk into the other component

[15:32:30 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> without creating inappropriate dependencies between the two

[15:33:17 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> You can actually transfer DOM nodes via direct reference via the DOM binder in IoC

[15:33:34 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> !!?

[15:33:36 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Depending on whether one component has visibility of the other via IoC resolution, this may already be enough to do what you need

[15:34:07 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> the transcript component is definitely in scope of the menu component

[15:34:09 CDT(-0500)]

<Bosmon> Simply write an IoC reference to

Unknown macro: {otherComponent}

.dom.selectorName

[15:34:16 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> !

[15:34:19 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> And the relevant DOM node will get injected

[15:34:43 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> that could be mighty helpful here

[15:34:51 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> thanks!

[15:34:55 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Good luck (smile)

[15:35:00 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> I'll let you know if it doesn't work (wink)

[15:35:24 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Yes, I am assessing the "expander" system rather critically now I am in the middle of the "ginger world" work

[15:35:30 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Currently they are the next thing to get working

[15:35:35 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> But I think, only for backwards compatibility

[15:35:37 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> good to konw

[15:35:53 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> All of these things are very crusty and ancient, and will most likely be replaced by their equivalents in the "model transformation" system

[15:36:13 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> After all we can't have TWO wildly different classes of things called "expanders" that do broadly similar jobs

[15:36:28 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Counting "renderer expanders" we would have THREE

[15:36:38 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Even more controversially, I think it will be possible to abolish those too

[15:37:06 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Although it would require a very different way of looking at the rendering process than we currently have

[15:37:31 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> yura1 stands to suffer the most from this, as so far by far the world's most prolific user of renderer expanders

[15:38:17 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> But all the same, colinclark quite correctly assured us last year that "the renderer expander system needs to be burned to the ground" : P

[15:46:44 CDT(-0500)] <yura1> Bosmon: hi

[15:47:13 CDT(-0500)] <yura1> Bosmon: i need some help with 2 pull requests of mine

[15:47:34 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Hi yura1

[15:48:07 CDT(-0500)] <yura1> Hi

[15:48:52 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> 4791 looks good

[15:49:17 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Although we probably don't need a test as elaborate as that one : P

[15:50:00 CDT(-0500)] <yura1> hah

[15:50:10 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> I do wonder why you might be removing a listener which doesn't exist, but the fix is certainly fine

[15:50:58 CDT(-0500)] <yura1> Bosmon: right

[15:51:09 CDT(-0500)] <yura1> it is not common

[15:51:48 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> FLUID-4790 will require more intensive assessment

[15:51:55 CDT(-0500)] <yura1> yes

[15:52:03 CDT(-0500)] <yura1> but i hope the tests will satisfy (smile)

[15:52:12 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Yes

[15:52:20 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> They are extremely extensive

[15:53:05 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Is it possible they could all share the same setup code?

[15:53:11 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> I'm just catching up on the logs here

[15:53:17 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> what a nice discussion (smile)

[15:53:18 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> They appear to begin with almost identical configuration

[15:53:21 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> "Although it would require a very different way of looking at the rendering process than we currently have"

[15:53:24 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> And

[15:53:37 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> "extremely extensive" tests

[15:53:42 CDT(-0500)] <yura1> Bosmon: yes possible

[15:53:43 CDT(-0500)] <colinclark> yay

[16:01:50 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Bsomon, fyi: worked like a charm, thanks

[16:18:10 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> Bosmon, I take it back: I'm having the same problem I had with deferred call: my component is being instantiated twice

[16:18:53 CDT(-0500)] <anastasiac> it does work, but it has this problem

[16:33:04 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Hi anastasiac - it could only be instantiated twice if you created some kind of pathway for that....

[16:33:10 CDT(-0500)] <Bosmon> Did you label your component as "createOnEvent"?