repeater inside itself

[diogo]

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.

[teppo]

Oh well, it was pretty obvious that someone had to try this

[Soma]

I actually tried it the first I did when it came out, it seemed to work, though silly and not tested further.

[apeisa]

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"..

[diogo]

Antii, that scenario works perfectly. Only A inside A gives strange results... as expected

[Soma]

Ahh i was talking about a in b. In itself doesnt make sense at all.

[Pete]

The joys of recursion

[diogo]

Ahh i was talking about a in b. In itself doesnt make sense at all.

You don't have a scientific spirit

[Soma]

You don't have a scientific spirit

Well, then I have something for your scientific spirit!

function turnPage(){
 turnPage();
}
turnPage();

[diogo]

That's scientific enough for me

[ryan]

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.

[martind]

i`m on 2.2.13 and repeater fields aren`t listed in selectable reapeater-fields of repeater A. Is that normal?

[Martijn Geerts]

LOL !

[martind]

LOL !

means what?

[Philipp]

@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.

[Martijn Geerts]

just a reaction on "repeater inside itself".

[martind]

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

[diogo]

Martind, he was laughing at me, not at you

[Martijn Geerts]

@diogo, you funny man

[martind]

yes, i see. was a bit confused.

[Martijn Geerts]

@martind: Sorry for that...

[martind]

no problem ... but wtf is with my repeater request??

[Soma]

Theres pregnant repeaters?

[martind]

... verge of bursting repeaters

[renobird]

Y'all are crazy.