Re: extending ftWatch to numeric and string

Hi Tomek, i replied on:

http://docs.farcrycms.org/display/FCDEV50/ftWatch+Example

Just to be sure you know, i don't see notifications on comments...


On Jun 5, 5:09 pm, Marco van den Oever <marcovandenoe...@...>
wrote:
> Awesome Tomek, gonna play with it asap :)
>
> On Jun 5, 4:57 pm, Tomek Kott <tkott.s...@...> wrote:
>
> > already found a problem when no ftDefault value is defined for the boolean.
> > Updated code (including javascript to get rid of the label showing up as
> > well) is here:
>
> >http://docs.farcrycms.org/display/FCDEV50/ftWatch+Example
>
> > Tomek
>
> > On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 10:49 PM, Tomek Kott <tkott.s...@...> wrote:
> > >http://docs.farcrycms.org/display/FCDEV50/ftWatch+Example
>
> > > quick editing job, feel free to correct / expand / etc.
>
> > > Tomek
>
> > > On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Tomek Kott <tkott.s...@...> wrote:
>
> > >> Hi All,
>
> > >> I wanted to play around with ftWatch and see what I could do with the
> > >> displays and such, and extending the two formtools (numeric, string) was
> > >> quite instructive. I thought it would be useful to post it here (and
> > >> eventually on wiki), since its an easy example of checking whether a boolean
> > >> field is being watched, and if so, displaying the input or not depending on
> > >> the boolean value:
>
> > >>         <cfif structkeyexists(arguments.stMetadata,"ftWatch") and
> > >> len(arguments.stMetadata.ftWatch)
> > >>             AND
> > >> structkeyexists(arguments.stObject,"#listfirst(arguments.stMetadata.ftWatch)#")
>
> > >>             AND
> > >> isValid("boolean",arguments.stObject[listfirst(arguments.stMetadata.ftWatch)])
>
> > >>             AND NOT
> > >> arguments.stObject[listfirst(arguments.stMetadata.ftWatch)] >
> > >>             <cfset html=""/>
> > >>         <cfelse>
> > >>             <cfset html = super.edit(argumentCollection="#arguments#") />
> > >>         </cfif>
>
> > >> And similar for display function.
>
> > >> Now if only I could get rid of the label for that as well...any ideas on
> > >> that?
>
> > >> Tomek
>
>