Does nanoc support nested partials? - nested

I am using partials in nanoc, and I was wondering if it's possible to nest partials in nanoc. In other words, can I have a partial within a partial?
When I tested this, the site compiled, but the nested partial did not display.
I'm using the Partials implementation described in this stackoverflow post: Must include files in nanoc always be in the layouts folder?
While nested partials are not required for what we're trying to do, I was just wondering if this is possible.
Thank you in advance.

Yes, you can use nested partials with nanoc. Here's a way to demonstrate this:
Create a new site using nanoc.
From within the site directory, create the folder content/partials.
Create the "outer" and "inner" partial content. In the file content/partials/_outer.html, place:
<p>This is the outer partial.</p>
<p><%= #items['/partials/_inner/'].compiled_content %></p>
And in the file content/partials/_inner.html:
This is the inner partial.
Note that we now have one partial including the contents of another.
Edit the main page, content/index.html, so it embeds the outer partial:
<h1>A Brand New nanoc Site</h1>
<%= #items['/partials/_outer/'].compiled_content %>
Add these rules to Rules above the ones already present:
# Filter but do not lay-out partial content
compile '/partials/*' do
filter :erb
end
# Do not output partials; they are only ever embedded in other content
route '/partials/*' do
nil
end
Now generate the site with nanoc compile. When you view it you'll see the inner partial content nested inside the outer partial content, nested inside the main page, like this:
A Brand New nanoc Site
This is the outer partial.
This is the inner partial.

Related

Adding additional content blocks in KeystoneJS with handlebars

I'm using handlebars with KeystoneJS and am trying to extend the main import in the default template. At the moment it only includes the {{{body}}} tag imported through the view plus the partials that I'm using.
Is there any way to add a couple of other imports (i.e. intro content, page title, additional scripts). In the jade version on the demo site it just imports it as a content block. Is this a limitation of handlebars?
You can do this with handlebars just fine using partials.
Put your partial in the folder indicated below:
Then in your layout ('default.hbs' in this case) reference the partial like you would normally in handlebars.
<div id="header">
{{> navigation this}}
</div>
The '>' means insert partial.
In this case 'navigation' is the
partial name in the partials folder.
'this' is the data context. Its what you want to do with the 'locals.data' object passed into handlebars by keystone. Using 'this' will pass the whole lot through whereas doing something like 'locals.data.navigation' would pass the navigation object through to the partial making it directly accessible in the partial (good for DRY).
Hope that helps. The partials specific documentiation for handlebars is here if you are interested in looking into a few more things you can do with scope etc http://handlebarsjs.com/partials.html

passing data to partials in ejs

I am using ejs-locals to give me support for partials in express/node.js
The problem is the library has a bug when you include a partial within a partial. The 2nd partial include is trying to find the file relative to the grandparent or page.ejs that called the 1st partial.
So this requires I either flatten out my ./views so all files are only in ./views (no sub-dirs)...or I symlink to the partial from the directory that made the initial partial call.
Perhaps there is another/better way of doing this?
In a lot of my views, I have a face mash, that gives me html with people's avatars. I can't just use <% include faces %> and call it a day, because the collection of people comes from many different objects depending on the page from which it is called.
here's an example:
on an item page, I call <% include stats %>, which calls faces partial
<- partial('faces', { people: item.users }) %>
or on a list page, I call <% include stats %>, which calls faces partial
<- partial('faces' { people: list.users }) %>
The partial 'faces.ejs' just loops over people and spits out a link to their profile. But because I can't include a partial within a partial I'm stuck either sym-linking all over the place or trying something different.
./views/list/index.ejs calls a stats.ejs partial that calls faces.ejs partial...so I need to symlink ./views/list/faces.ejs to ./views/stats/faces.ejs for it to work.
You cannot pass data to a simple include, so I cannot pass in different collections of users depending on the context in which it was called.
<% include faces %> would require the face.ejs loop over either item.users or list.users hardcoded in faces.ejs
What else can I do that will work with nested partials/includes? I have filed a bug with ejs-locals, and a few others have as well, but its been a month w/o any fix.

Jade template inheritance

Jade template inheritance in Jade is driving me mad...
The problem is that I would like to exclude a large bit of code to external template and then include it. When I do so everything gets f** up :/
Sample code:
!!!5
html(lang="en")
head
title sample title
body
header
div#someDiv
div#someContent
section#main
Let's say I want to exclude everything from top to div#someContent. Then I would have
include inc/header
section#main
This way code indentation goes wrong and everything is messed up :/ Can you point me to the right direction in including templates?
Thanks in advance!
This is not template inheritance, but includes (template inheritance is with block and extends keywords). I did try your code, and what it does with the include is insert "section#main" into "div#someDiv" instead of "div#someContent". Not sure if this should be considered a bug or what (how can the parser know if the added content should be inside the last item in the include file, or at the same level?). It doesn't seem to care about the level of indentation under the "include" statement.
However, if you DO use template inheritance, you can put an empty block at the end of your include:
!!!5
html(lang="en")
head
title sample title
body
header
div#someDiv
div#someContent
block content
Then you can append the block in your actual content file:
include inc/header
block append content
section#main
And this renders OK in the DOM (section#main is inside div#someContent). Depending on the structure of your views, you may be better off with "extends" instead of "include + block append". You can check Jade's GitHub doc for the details.

Pagination on Single-Entry view in ExpressionEngine

I am building a website with ExpressionEngine as the CMS. There is a "Work" section that displays all the projects, and a detail view that shows each project individually. It is at this point, on the single-entry view that I would like to have "prev" and "next" pagination. In my tests I have made it work when the URL is "somedomain.com/index.php/work/detail/" but it does not work when the specific entry is part of the URL: "somedomain.com/index.php/work/detail/some_project/"
I've tried putting the pagination code outside of the {exp:weblog:entries} tag as well as within it, but to no avail. This is what my pagination code looks like:
{paginate}
<ul>
{if previous_page}
<li>< previous</li>
{/if}
{if next_page}
<li>next ></li>
{/if}
</ul>
{/paginate}
You are using pagination for lists of entries, what you need is the next / previous entry tags:
http://expressionengine.com/user_guide/modules/channel/entry_linking.html
Hmm. I'm not sure what the issue is here, as I've never used the {pagination} tag in that way. After checking out the docs, I see that the example code for prev/next links inside of the {pagination} tag is wrapped inside of an {exp:comment:entries} loop instead of the normal {exp:channel:entries} loop.
The docs aren't very clear about the scope of this particular feature of the {pagination} tag. You might want to double check that, in your {exp:channel:entries} loop, you haven't included pagination as a value in the disable parameter.
You could also check out the page in EE's user guide about Next/Prev Linking, which details the use of {exp:channel:next_entry} and {exp:channel:prev_entry} tags in place of the {pagination} tag that you've been using. I've used these tags without a hitch, so I definitely recommend trying them if you can't get your method to work.
Best of luck!

asp.net webpages content block and helper differences

In asp.net webpages framework what is the difference between using a content block versus a helper?
They both seem to be used to output HTML to multiple pages. They both can contain code and both can pass parameters.
Are there other differences? When should you use a helper versus a content block?
More info:
With Content Blocks we create a .cshtml (for example _MakeNote.cshtml) file to hold the content we want to insert into a page. Then we use:
#RenderPage("/Shared/_MakeNote.cshtml")
to insert the content into a page. We can pass parameters to the content block like this:
#RenderPage("/Shared/_MakeNote.cshtml", new { content = "hello from content block" })
It's somewhat like an include file, but I think does not share scope with the parent page.
With Helpers we create a .cshtml page in the App_Code folder (for example MyHelpers.cshtml) and place methods in that page which we want to call. The method looks something like this:
#helper MakeNote(string content) {
<div>#content</div>
}
The helper is called by using:
#MyHelpers.MakeNote("Hello from helper")
There isn't a lot of difference functionally. Helpers need to go into an App_Code folder - unless you download VWD or Visual C# Express and compile a binary - and the App_Code folder doesn't translate well to the MVC framework. Of course, that's only relevant if you want to upgrade to MVC at some point.
I would use a helper for generic functional snippets like your MakeNote. I would use a "content-block" (partial, really) for repeated site-specific sections of a page.

Resources