diogo Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Ok, i did it I put a repeater inside itself just to see what would happen, and the result is not pretty. As soon as you create a page with it, it creates a big number of repeater pages and breaks the system. It would be better if PW would just disallow this. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teppo Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Oh well, it was pretty obvious that someone had to try this 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soma Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 I actually tried it the first I did when it came out, it seemed to work, though silly and not tested further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apeisa Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 If I understood correctly this is a scenario where "repeater A" includes "repeater A"? I'm not in a position to test, but does it work if I have two different repeaters and other one is part of other? Like "repeater A" has "repeater B".. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogo Posted May 30, 2012 Author Share Posted May 30, 2012 Antii, that scenario works perfectly. Only A inside A gives strange results... as expected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soma Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Ahh i was talking about a in b. In itself doesnt make sense at all. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 The joys of recursion 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogo Posted May 30, 2012 Author Share Posted May 30, 2012 Ahh i was talking about a in b. In itself doesnt make sense at all. You don't have a scientific spirit 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soma Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 You don't have a scientific spirit Well, then I have something for your scientific spirit! function turnPage(){ turnPage(); } turnPage(); Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogo Posted May 31, 2012 Author Share Posted May 31, 2012 That's scientific enough for me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryan Posted May 31, 2012 Share Posted May 31, 2012 Repeaters should be okay with putting repeater B inside repeater A. But if you are putting repeater A inside repeater A… all bets are off. We'll have to add some extra checking for the folks that need the infinite recursive depth repeater features in their site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martind Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 i`m on 2.2.13 and repeater fields aren`t listed in selectable reapeater-fields of repeater A. Is that normal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martijn Geerts Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 LOL ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martind Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 LOL ! means what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philipp Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 @martind You have to install it first. PW comes bundled with the module, but you have to go to Modules - Repeater and click install. After that, you should find "Repeater" as a new field type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martijn Geerts Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 just a reaction on "repeater inside itself". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martind Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 thanks philipp, i`m familiar with the repeater field and have used it a few times in nested context as discribed in this thread further up. now I have a setup with a newer pw-release and it seems, that it is no longer possible to nest repeater field A inside repeater field B. @martijn ... if i interpret your, a bit cynic seeming, responses right, this is not a new question? ah, ... i don`t mean a repeater in itself but a repeater field inside another repeater field Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diogo Posted February 19, 2013 Author Share Posted February 19, 2013 Martind, he was laughing at me, not at you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martijn Geerts Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 @diogo, you funny man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martind Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 yes, i see. was a bit confused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martijn Geerts Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 @martind: Sorry for that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martind Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 no problem ... but wtf is with my repeater request?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soma Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Theres pregnant repeaters? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martind Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 ... verge of bursting repeaters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
renobird Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Y'all are crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now