szabesz

Techniques to use in order to cut down on new field creation: Free: https://processwire.com/blog/posts/making-efficient-use-of-fields-in-processwire/ https://processwire.com/blog/posts/processwire-3.0.73-and-new-fieldset-types/ https://processwire.com/blog/posts/pw-3.0.87/#new-field-template-context-settings https://processwire.com/blog/posts/processwire-3.0.14-updates-file-compiler-fields-and-more/#best-practices-with-fields-and-values https://processwire.com/blog/posts/pw-3.0.106/#a-new-way-to-search-with-upgraded-tags-for-fields Paid but this money supports the project ? https://processwire.com/store/pro-fields/ https://processwire.com/blog/posts/functional-fields/

@ryan I've just noticed that "tablet viewports" are odd. We get a huge decor image and a very long "footer" taking up more space than the actual content. Screenshot is inside the spoiler:

+1 These magic functions are "hard" to decode when reading, at least it is a syntax no one is used to, so when people come across things like this they will just get confused. Generally speaking, it is great to have options but if more and more ways are implemented to do very same thing, then when one is looking at someone else's source code it will become harder and harder to decode it if it was written in "another dialect" of the ProcessWire API than one is used to. If this trend continues, reading ProcessWire source code will become harder than it should be.

Thanks for sharing your modules today ? Just a quick note of a copy-paste error, this links to your other module:

However, there are exceptions as noted ? the max size image imagefiled constrain and/or client-side image resizing might result in having a different file stored instead of the original supplied.

You can learn about it in this post: Also note that since ProcessWire 3.0.63 client-side resize gives us another option in the mix https://processwire.com/blog/posts/processwire-3.0.63-adds-client-side-image-resizing/ So it all depends on how you set it up and implement it. It is possible to serve unaltered images if you make sure PW does not touch it in the first place. However, it is only recommended for tech tech-savvy users or for special use cases.

This is creepy... Luckily I've never had wifi issues with any of our Mac laptops and so far we've used eight of them in our family, five of them sill being used daily. However, _yesterday_ morning the wifi of my MBP 2015 started malfunctioning so I did not visit the forum because I was also troubleshooting.... I could not solve the issue even though I've read a ton of trouble shooting guides (I was still running Sierra for the last two years.). Late afternoon I decided to perform a clean install of Mojave 10.14.3 on an "empty" APSF volume just to see if its a hardware or software issue and it appears to be the latter because by running a clean install the wifi works fine. My issue is that the while the wifi connection seems to be still on, all network operations start to fail when a random period of time passed by after booting, and only restarting the system helps. I did not dig too much into the issue because my aging Sierra setup needs to be replaced with a new system anyway, it's just that normally it takes 2 or 3 weeks to install and configure _all_ the software I need so that is why I usually do it every two years. Sorry for not being able to help, but it is kinda strange that we ran into a similar issue nearly the same time. Regarding Mojave, I like it's performance. We have it installed on an 2013 MBP too and it performs well on both machines. Comparing to Sierra, it is sort of the same in the performance arena.

I know, however, @sforsman seems to have abandoned the project as he does not pay attention to our pings, while @arjen stated that he is happy to maintain his/their fork. ...and in the end, one will probably reinvent the decimal. The same goes for the module being recommended ?

Sorry for repeating myself, but:

Oooops ?

I have already mentioned this in the comment section of the very first blogpost of Ryan showcasing it. Luckily I use the Dark Reader chrome extension to browse most sites anyway, but it would be nice to see a lot less contrast. Better yet, a native dark mode for the site would be welcome. We have just been presented with a nice example: https://processwire.com/talk/topic/20584-schwarzdesign/ (click the sun icon of the site in the top right corner).

Well, test driven development would be useful for sure, so he is still talking about the topic even though the way he does so is not fruitful at all.

@cb2004 Hi, I recommend adding your case to the GutHub issue so that it gets more highlight this way. Could you please do that?

Hello, it doesn't sound like a solution to me. Probably this problem should be posted in the right GitHub issue: https://github.com/processwire/processwire-issues/issues?utf8=✓&q=windows+path whichever it is...

Thanks, sure, the wording "hasField" does indeed imply that, it is just that using "valid" in this context is not something I remember seeing before.

Me too, and even in the case of the blog listing and similar. To tell the truth, I never liked the current trend of putting everything into "cards" when a sidebar+vertical listing page is the most usable layout. Cards are stylish but at cost of usability and I think it is a high price to pay, in my designs I try not to use them without a serious and valid reason. For the time being, I started to browse the site under the 960px viewport by turning on the inspector so that I do not have to resize the whole window. This way I get one column only.

I wonder what "valid" mean in this context: https://processwire.com/api/ref/page/has-field/ $page->hasField() => "Returns whether or not $field is valid for this Page" Anyone can shed light on this for me?

Plain text in YAML ? http://sangsoonam.github.io/2017/03/13/yaml-vs-json.html "Use YAML for configuration files since YAML is really human-readable." And we could use a diff tool to compare (my favorite is Beyond Compare, btw ? ).

If I was Ryan – which I'm not ? – I would create a short intro for newcomers (I do not use the word "beginners" on purpose because a pro PHP developer can still be new to ProcessWire) and even this short intro should be clearly divided into two sections: one for frontend development recommended best practices and one for module development recommended best practices. At the end of this introductory article, I would link to this verbose one we currently have.

Introduced in ProcessWire 3.0.117 https://processwire.com/blog/posts/processwire-3.0.117-core-updates/

I recommend @arjen's fork instead: https://github.com/arjenblokzijl/FieldtypeDecimal as @sforsman seems to have abandoned his module.

Hi, if you can tell me how to test this quickly (eg. by using some online service) without any convoluted software installation requirements then I'm happy to test it for you. Otherwise I am not using their service all the time, only for certain occasions. So far I cannot complain.

Me too. I also think that "mixing it up" for a newcomer the various ways to use the API is not a good idea, even the tabbed interface idea (which is great) feels a bit too much to present to a beginner. If the function API is the preferable one on the frontend, then all frontend examples should use that one only and only module related docs should use another one (which one is preferable in that case). There should be an article explaining all the other ways to do the very similar, and only in the "advanced" category. BTW, some docs tag pages/tutorials as beginner/intermediate/advanced. I think ProcessWire docs could use those too.

Yeah, the only concern of mine is just this, so that I (we) can search google like "Admin Actions" and "Admin Tools" separately ? Haha ? it would be okay for an application or a module since it is a made up word but not so good for something descriptive as much as possible like a panel's name.

Quick Actions Utility Actions Shortcut Actions Tracy Shortcuts Utilities