Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Activity
  • Jun 30 17:02
    ahoward commented #97
  • Jun 30 17:01
    ahoward commented #97
  • Jun 30 16:58
  • Jun 30 09:01
    flash-gordon commented #97
  • Jun 30 03:07
    ahoward labeled #97
  • Jun 30 03:07
    ahoward opened #97
  • Jun 30 03:07
    ahoward labeled #97
  • Jun 28 13:44
  • Jun 28 10:17
    kroolp commented #83
  • Jun 28 07:49
    solnic commented #83
  • Jun 28 07:47
    solnic commented #84
  • Jun 27 16:07
    kroolp review_requested #84
  • Jun 27 16:07
    kroolp opened #84
  • Jun 27 16:05
    kroolp labeled #83
  • Jun 27 16:05
    kroolp labeled #83
  • Jun 27 16:05
    kroolp opened #83
  • Jun 27 15:26
  • Jun 27 07:35

    solnic on release-1.3

    Update unit.html.md Corrected … Merge pull request #164 from bl… (compare)

  • Jun 27 07:35
    solnic closed #164
  • Jun 26 14:07
    blauentag opened #164
Tim Riley
@timriley
@solnic yeah, I did see you mention something like this! I figured if we could get it going well enough as-is, then it'll be a nice transition later on to the built-in form handling stuff :)
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
@timriley I’ll be updating it very soon, just need to get the rodakase basic stuff up and running
Tim Riley
@timriley
No problems. I'll happily roadtest the thing for you.
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
@AMHOL would be nice to put together a roadmap for dry-* gems so that we can see the big picture and hopefuly get more people contributing; from my pov validation + data are currently number 1 prio, but there are also some things that we could improve in dry-container and auto_inject (actualy thinking about renaming it to dry-import)
ugh, sorry, I meant that number 1 prio is GETTING A LOGO FOR THE ORG :joy:
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
Lol, yeah, need to organise it more like ROM I guess
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
(byebug) view_class.config
#<struct engine=:slim, layout="app", template="users">
(byebug) Class.new(view_class).config
#<struct engine=nil, layout=nil, template=nil>
@AMHOL is this expected?
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
Hmm, nah, looks like a bug
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
@AMHOL it works with setting :foo, ‘bar’
this one will be inherited
but the configured settings won't
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
Ahh ok, i'll have a look tomorrow if thats ok?
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
no rush at all
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
Cool, going to meet friends for drinks soon
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
@solnic dryrb/dry-configurable@992d16a
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
@solnic dryrb/dry-container@7f905a6
Saw you mentioned that in a comment in Rodakase too
François Bernier
@fbernier
Hey, there is this API client at my workplace which uses Hashie::Mash and I don't like it. I am checking out dry-data. Looks like it could replace it right?
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
@fbernier kinda :) dry-data’s structs require you to define attributes
François Bernier
@fbernier
yeah that's mostly the part I want to replace.
Looks neat so I'll give it a try!
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
ok, that’s cool :) remember it’s very alpha though
I have big plans for this lib, but for now I’m busy with other stuff
fwiw it’s been very useful for me already, but there are some rough edges
François Bernier
@fbernier
yeah that's fine. I'll try helping if I hit any unmet needs or issues.
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
that’s awesome :)
François Bernier
@fbernier
Not possible to set a default value to an attribute right?
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
nope, it’s not this kind of a library
François Bernier
@fbernier
alright
so if I have those kind of needs, should I be looking into virtus instead ?
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
@AMHOL wdyt about a feature in dry-container to memoize resolved object?
container.register(‘foo’, singleton: true) { Foo.new }
would that be too much?
I think it’s gonna be a common pattern that you only want to have one instance
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
@solnic just do container.register('foo', Foo.new)
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
I can’t in some places
becauase Foo.new may need Bar.new
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
If Foo#call is implemented, you'll need container.register('foo', Foo.new, call: false)
Fair point
Yep, I think we could add that interface
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
that would be awesome
it would give a speed boost
ie my current rails app has everything provided by the container, on each request we build a lot of objects and many of them can be singletons
like rom repos etc
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
Yeah, makes sense, I didn't think about that when I made the register('blah', Blah.new) interface, I think I might remove that
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
it shouldn’t be too hard to do on the container side and it would simplify things
Andy Holland
@AMHOL
Could probably simplify things if I remove that and the proc interface and only allow block registration with options
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
yes
Piotr Solnica
@solnic
@AMHOL it would also allow us to require files within the block