| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:36 |
poluta1 |
Hedz, cobol, moelee : thank you.. yes.. i understand now... |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:34 |
stabb |
hai |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:34 |
crux |
hai |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:34 |
stabb |
oh hey |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:30 |
cobol |
does that make sense? |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:30 |
cobol |
that makes everything automagic, for the most part |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:30 |
cobol |
so it's a naming convention aided by camelcasing |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:30 |
cobol |
i.e. to store objects of type 'Food', you create a table called 'Foods' with a controller called 'Foods Controller', and you can access related objects called food 'Bins' by having a key named 'bin_id' |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:29 |
moelee |
well that's just one example |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:29 |
moelee |
to make connections between tables and models |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:29 |
cobol |
poluta1: it basically means that you dont need to explicitly state things because there is a standard way of expressin them already |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:29 |
moelee |
cakephp relies on naming conventions |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:29 |
moelee |
umm |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:28 |
Hedz |
so you dont need to configure it... its convention |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:28 |
Hedz |
all table names must be plural |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:28 |
Hedz |
example of convetions is tables names |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:28 |
poluta1 |
can somebody explain to me..? what is convention over configuration ? owwhh... silly question.. :( sorry |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:21 |
Jezek |
how can i cache an array |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:15 |
cobol |
good programmers always are |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:15 |
nymacro |
I'm like that. You know. Lazy |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:14 |
nymacro |
It isn't really a problem. Was just interested if there was a better way to do it :P |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:14 |
nymacro |
lol |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:14 |
cobol |
;) |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:14 |
cobol |
shut it :P |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:14 |
cobol |
seriously |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:14 |
cobol |
if thats the biggest problem you're having |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:14 |
nymacro |
Oh well |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:14 |
cobol |
it would break saves |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:14 |
nymacro |
that way when you iterate over $array['Post'] it would have the same behaviour |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:14 |
cobol |
that would violate convention, actually |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:13 |
cobol |
nah |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:13 |
nymacro |
(something which would make it consistently $array['Post'][index]['Post]['id']) |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:13 |
nymacro |
Was just wondering if there were a better way |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:13 |
nymacro |
yeah |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:12 |
cobol |
if it has sub-children, change behavior, or vice versa |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:12 |
cobol |
i'd just run checks on the data array |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:12 |
nymacro |
no worries |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:12 |
cobol |
sorry, it took me a while to get your problem |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:12 |
cobol |
the nesting behavior is explicit to support the automatic relationships |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:12 |
cobol |
really only with a custom query, from what i know |
| # |
Aug 6th 2008, 22:11 |
nymacro |
Just wondering if there is a way to make it keep the same form |