Render Refactoring#8
Open
marcus-n3rd wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
Conversation
Removed the module file and moved the view argument parsing to the ViewfieldDefaultFormatter class. Adding a theme element seemed excessive for a couple of HTML element classes, so `viewfield_formatter_default` and its twig file was removed. Recursion prevention could be handled in the ViewfieldDefaultFormatter::prepareView() method. (WIP, likely next commit).
Also, renamed machine name from `viewfield_default` to `viewfield_formatter`. Note that I personally debated having it simply `viewfield` to match the naming conventions of core, the image field in particular.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Turns out that I was wrong with PR #4, as it never actually processed the render class. After stepping through the module's current render process and comparing it to others (image field's namely). I decided it could be simplified and still operate as it has been.
I feel this will innately solve the same problems that PRs #2, #3, and #5 are trying to solve.
I doubt this is the final answer, but I think this should be a good start.