This is a good argument to not include it.
On Jul 24, 9:40 pm, Michael Ellis <michael.f.el...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm of two minds on this. It's a one-liner to implement as I've done it,
> but my implementation hides the rich argument set available in
> simplejson.dumps():
>
> dumps(obj, skipkeys=False, ensure_ascii=True, check_circular=True,
> allow_nan=True, cls=None, indent=None, separators=None, encoding='utf-8',
> default=None, use_decimal=False, **kw)
>
> It also hides the arguments available to XML().
>
> If implemented, I think it would be good to provide as many of the
> arguments as make sense for its use as a helper -- which probably means all
> of them.
>
> Regarding controller vs view, I think it should be available, like all the
> other helpers, in either context.
>
> Whether we implement it or not, I think the technique of passing python
> objects into javascript at render time with json serialization is quite
> useful and merits an example in the next revision of the book.
>
> Cheers,
> Mike
>
> On Sat, Jul 24, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Scott <blueseas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I think the JSON helper function should be implemented. This logic
> > should be contained within the controller and not within the view as I
> > would deem it business logic and not rendering logic.
>
> > On Jul 24, 7:52 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote:
> > > 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">
> > > > >>> /* <
