Misleading claim on readme: administrate does have a DSL. #2267
Comments
|
Yeah, I agree. I have been thinking that for a while, and even have felt at times that the constants can be a bit annoying and would rather have them as methods. (Although that won't happen for now, as there are other priorities). Would you be able to volunteer a rephrasing of that portion of the README? |
|
Yeah, I agree too. I think if we were to re-approach the problem now class methods would be a nicer way of doing things — I definitely avoid constants where I can usually. It'd be great to re-phrase in such a way to demonstrate the difference in approach you mention — we want it to be easy to override and get out of the way and that's the main motivation of the project. |
|
Seems unanimous, I like your example of ActiveAdmin's approach, they had been my main inspiration for changing our old approach. Ended up seeing a couple 1500-line AA dashboard files once, makes you shudder. So I hope some clear direction can be gained. ATTRIBUTE_TYPES = {
status: Field::Select.with_options(
searchable: false,
collection: %w[draft review approved] },
)
}... could become ... def self.build
shape(:status) { Field::Select.searchable(false).collection(%w[draft review approved]) }
end |
This comment was marked as off-topic.
This comment was marked as off-topic.
The original intent of the line in the README was to emphasise that it's not fully DSL-driven, instead as close to standard Rails as possible. This rephrases to avoid saying "we don't have a DSL", but try and provide a more useful way to describe the projects' vision. Closes #2267
|
I'm gradually building towards releasing v1.0.0 and this has been on my mind as I've been trying to think about what that might look like. I've opened #2505 to try and remove the DSL suggestion and come up with a better wording. |
A DSL is more than class methods invoked in class definitions.
Are we really declaring that the following is not a DSL:
and the following would be a DSL?
What is so great about using constants vs class methods? That is still a set of predefined names that the user has to know and follow their expected value structure in order to work, so IMO there's absolutely no difference.
I believe that the greatest disadvantage of ActiveAdmin was that they went too far with the DSL: they created a DSL even for defining forms when you could just write a form erb file using the Rails helpers with not many more lines of code.
But to me, having to define things in a declarative way via constants with specific names in Administrate is not different at all from calling class methods on the class definition such as ActiveAdmin does for declaring basic things such as columns available for the index page.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: