In the views in codeigniter, we can write code for forms using codeigniter. For example for an url the code in codeigniter is:
<?php
anchor('site/myfunction','Send');
?>
My question is whether is better write this code with html in the views:
Send
It's an example, but the question is with all HTML helpers for views. CodeIgniter's user guide suggests to use PHP functions rather than code html. The php code requests to the server while html does not. Is better use the CodeIgniter for HTML? I don't know if when I use CodeIgniter's helpers, the framework has contemplated these requests.
I apologize for my english. Thanks for your answer.
The reason you want to use CodeIgniters library is for the ability to quickly modify your HTML elements site-wide with very little work. For instance, let's say you wanted all <a> tags on your site to have a class added called "ajax". Using the anchor helper, you can accomplish this easily.
That said, I don't really foresee many solutions where you will be changing HTML elements site-wide. With semantic HTML, CSS, and Javascript I think you will be perfectly fine without having to use CodeIgniters HTML helpers. Also in my opinion your code will be much more readable. Use HTML.
Regarding performance
When you say "code php does requests to the server while html, no" you're wrong because whenever someone visits your site they are requesting the server. The question here is how much work the PHP engine is doing versus just your normal webserver. In this case, a function call is trivial for PHP and shouldn't be considered performance wise.
Regarding urls
The answer by Pi is focused on the fact that URL resolution in CodeIgniter can be weird, but with proper .htaccess or web.config configurations you should be able to use vanilla hrefs without using CodeIgniter functions.
You should not use
Send
Because it might not work everywhere. But if you use this:
Send
There will be no big difference. Pure HTML is a bit faster but unless you have a high traffic website that does not matter. Using the CI function is nice if you are in a library because you do not want to mix PHP and HTML to much to keep up the Model-View-Controller concept. What you use in a view is a matter of style what you like more.
Personally I think the codeigniter form functions are not very good and I am often use html instead.
Related
I just want to create custom html with good css form with my own php as backhand code and javascript for validation.. Is there any extension for this?
I have seen few extensions but none of them allows me to add my own php backhand code.
Thanks
If you are not going to use Joomla's framework, then you may as well build the form outside of joomla and insert it into the article via an iframe (you may need to change the editor's permissions to allow you to do this).
It is worth looking into using the framework properly, however, as it does have easy-to-use mail classes and actually makes things easier when you get your head around it.
(Though to answer your actual question - this module appears to allow you to add raw php http://extensions.joomla.org/extensions/core-enhancements/coding-a-scripts-integration/custom-code-in-modules/3668 )
is it possible, or how could I make it so, I can include my topbar file into my page, I'd prefer it not to be with php since I am not hooked up with localhost yet.
Thanks for all help in advance!
HTML5 now allows you to include html files like you can already include a css file via an import. However, this would only be helpful for during your development stages and not for the final production version since the feature currently is only available in Chrome and will take time for the other browsers to adopt: http://www.html5rocks.com/en/tutorials/webcomponents/imports/
If you don't want to use PHP nor any other server-side scripting language,
you can use either <iframe> or <frameset> tags, which are deprecated, or perform an AJAX request using Javascript that embeds your HTML page dynamically. Second approach will work only if the page you're trying to attach is located within the same domain due to XSS protection in modern browsers.
It's more of a server thing, so to speak, so you would have to rely on the server more for this. Because, you cannot simply do this using static script, like HTML. There's no "built-in function" that can do this, it's not HTML's thing.
I mean, server will offer you more than one option, for example:
You can:
Use SSI (Server-side Includes) if server supports it.
Use PHP or ASP includes.
Otherwise, you can use AJAX for this, won't cost you as much as the above options.
If you mean "header" by saying "topbar", I think it's not a good idea to use iframes.
Files which are truly HTML parsed files can not include another file to my knowledge.
If you web server will parse php you could simply change the extension of the the main file to .php and include() the topbar file:
mv index.html index.php
index.php:
include_once("topbar.html");
Use <!--#include file="footer_text.html" -->
inside html page.
Plz, check below url for details.
https://www.lifewire.com/include-html-file-in-another-3469529
I need an easy way to generate static web pages so that I can serve them up with Apache or Nginx. Currently I am using SproutCore's build tool (Abbot) to generate static pages but that is a little bit cumbersome as it is designed for building SproutCore apps, not non-SproutCore HTML pages.
Here are my requirements:
Javascript must be combined and minified
CSS files must be combined
Each image / CSS / Javascript asset must have unique URL for better caching (query string isn't enough)
Asset URL should be different only when it really changes
Localization support thorough HTML, CSS, Javascript and image files
Nice template engine with layouts, partials etc.
Here are possible solutions I have found:
Create the site using Ruby on Rails, then get all resources using wget like http://usefulfor.com/ruby/2009/03/23/use-rails-to-create-a-static-site-rake-and-subversion/
Use Middleman: http://middlemanapp.com
Any thoughts on this?
After a longish evaluation process I have decided to use Middleman. It does the trick and I love its simplicity and the fact that I can use existing Rack components with it.
Best Regards,
Pekka Mattila
I'm the creator of Middleman and would be eager to help you get comfortable using Middleman. My main goal is to give users the power of Rails, but focused on static development. Some of the actual code of Middleman is simplified versions of Ab
Here's what I do:
Ruby on Rails 3 with the High Voltage Gem, which makes it easy
to serve a static page body using the common templates. It requires a
simple entry in the routes (and you can use namespaces to create a
hierarchy).
Apache reverse proxy to stand-alone Passenger (which uses nginx I
believe) to run the Rails app. This article describes how to
configure it.
Stand-alone passenger will read the URL, see if there is a corresponding file in /public with the .html on it, and serve that. If not found, it will invoke Rails and generate the page. In essence, page caching, with the option of publishing your URLs with or without the .html. There is a section in the Passenger docs about page caching specifically.
As far as combining and minifying js and css, here's a good stackoverflow thread.
Rails has excellent i18n/l10n support.
Rails template engine is very nice to work with. And you can use HAML if you prefer.
For your 3rd and 4th points, I'm a little confused. You want css and js combined, but then you want each to have it's own URL. In Rails, the "cache => true" directive on asset tags takes care of adding a query string parameter that changes when the content does, which is a fairly traditional scheme. I'm not sure what context you are working in where that would not work. Any CDN I've ever used works fine with that, as does an web server implementing the HTTP spec correctly. Anyway, changing the actual path or file in the URL would require changing all references to it. Maybe I'm misunderstanding?
Monkeyman has the template engine you need, I think. Think of it as Middleman's little Scala brother. Nowhere as mature or feature rich yet, but we'll get there eventually. The current incarnation supports HAML, Jade, SSP for layouts, Markdown for content and a couple of other things.
Without any special order
jekyll - quite simple
middleman - a lot of funcionalities
nanoc - a lot of funcionalities
stasis - use controllers
staticmatic
frank
gumdrop
ruby on rails + wget
ruby on rails + high voltage + apache reverse proxy
You should probably also checkout mod_pagespeed. It will at least give you this:
Javascript must be combined and minified
CSS files must be combined
Each image / CSS / Javascript asset must have unique URL for better caching (query string isn't enough)
Asset URL should be different only when it really changes
It won't give you this:
Localization support thorough HTML, CSS, Javascript and image files
Nice template engine with layouts, partials etc.
You can have a look at docpad. It's written in coffeescript and runs on Nodejs. It is document based, where you write some documents and layouts, it will compile them and write them in the out directory. You can write documents in a lot of languages via plugins
It also supports multiple level of file compilation. For example from eco to markdown to html.
Another great feature of it is that you can query on other documents being generated in a document. For example in the first page, you have something like this to get all blog posts:
database.findAll({url : /posts/})
Which will return all documents having posts in their url.
I'm working on a website that uses AJAX to retrieve data from the server and display it on the page. Django renders the initial page content using its template engine (so it will be indexed by search engines). When the user takes an action, jQuery fetches the new data via AJAX and the response is returned as JSON. I would like to have jQuery render this new content without violating the DRY Principle. Therefore I would like to use a templating engine that is "shared" between Django and jQuery. I've been running in circles trying to find the best solution but always seem to run into a road block.
Has this already been done? Here are the options I have thought of:
Use regular expressions to transform the Django template into correct jQuery template syntax, and render it in its raw form to the page. jQuery will then pick it up and use it to render the new data.
Extend the jQuery template engine to recognize the Django template syntax, again rendering the raw Django template to the page for jQuery to use.
Has this been successfully done before? Either way seems like a lot of work for anything but the simplest of Django templates because of the plethora of Django tags and filters that would need accounted for.
Your best bet is to pick a template language that has both Javascript and Python support, and use that everywhere.
As far as I know, Mustache is your best bet.
I haven't found a perfect solution since I asked this question, but for the sake of development time I resorted to sending back both JSON and HTML in the AJAX response. This way the django templates still perform the HTML generation, but javascript is still free to utilize the data without having to parse the HTML.
I am sending approximately twice the data over the network, but I'm going to live with it until my application grows to the point where a smaller response is beneficial. At that point I will probably look into something like Mustache as Rob mentioned.
I am trying to find the optimal architecture for an ajax-heavy Django application I'm currently building. I'd like to keep a consistent way of doing forms, validation, fetching data, JSON message format but find it exceedingly hard to find a solution that can be used consistently.
Can someone point me in the right direction or share their view on best practice?
I make everything as normal views which display normally in the browser. That includes all the replies to AJAX requests (sub pages).
When I want to make bits of the site more dynamic I then use jQuery to do the AJAX, or in this case AJAH and just load the contents of one of the divs in the sub page into the requesting page.
This technique works really well - it is very easy to debug the sub pages as they are just normal pages, and jQuery makes your life very easy using these as part of an AJA[XH]ed page.
For all the answers to this, I can't believe no one's mentioned django-piston yet. It's mainly promoted for use in building REST APIs, but it can output JSON (which jQuery, among others, can consume) and works just like views in that you can do anything with a request, making it a great option for implementing AJAX interactions (or AJAJ [JSON], AJAH, etc whatever). It also supports form validation.
I can't think of any standard way to insert ajax into a Django application, but you can have a look to this tutorial.
You will also find more details on django's page about Ajax
Two weeks ago I made a write up how I implement sub-templates to use them in "normal" and "ajax" request (for Django it is the same). Maybe it is helpful for you.
+1 to Nick for pages displaying normally in the browser. That seems to be the best starting point.
The problem with the simplest AJAX approaches, such as Nick and vikingosegundo propose, is that you'll have to rely on the innerHTML property in your Javascript. This is the only way to dump the new HTML sent in the JSON. Some would consider this a Bad Thing.
Unfortunately I'm not aware of a standard way to replicate the display of forms using Javascript that matches the Django rendering. My approach (that I'm still working on) is to subclass the Django Form class so it outputs bits of Javascript along with the HTML from as_p() etc. These then replicate the form my manipulating the DOM.
From experience I know that managing an application where you generate the HTML on the server side and just "insert" it into your pages, becomes a nightmare. It is also impossible to test using the Django test framework. If you're using Selenium or a similar tool, it's ok, but you need to wait for the ajax request to go return so you need tons of sleeps in your test script, which may slow down your test suite.
If the purpose of using the Ajax technique is to create a good user interface, I would recommend going all in, like the GMail interface, and doing everything in the browser with JavaScript. I have written several apps like this using nothing but jQuery, state machines for managing UI state and JSON with ReST on the backend. Django, IMHO, is a perfect match for the backend in this case. There are even third party software for generating a ReST-interface to your models, which I've never used myself, but as far as I know they are great at the simple things, but you of course still need to do your own business logic.
With this approach, you do run into the problem of duplicating code in the JS and in your backend, such as form handling, validation, etc. I have been thinking about solving this with generating structured information about the forms and validation logic which I can use in JS. This could be compiled at deploy-time and be loaded as any other JS file.
Also, avoid XML. The browsers are slow at parsing it, it is a pain to generate and a pain to work with in the browser. Use JSON.
Im currently testing:
jQuery & backbone.js client-side
django-piston (intermediate layer)
Will write later my findings on my blog http://blog.sserrano.com