Finish #1998

[xabbuh]

Q	A
Doc fix?	no
New docs?	no
Applies to	all
Fixed tickets	replaces #1998

[xabbuh]

Shouldn't form.task.vars.form be task.vars.form?

[wouterj]

If I understand things correctly, this does not use the method proposed by @stof in #1998 (comment), does it?

If so, could you please update this?

[xabbuh]

I think you're right. Though I'm not sure what exactly needs to be changed. Does this block replace the call to render() in the loop?

[wouterj]

Yes, if I understand it correctly

Op do 11 dec. 2014 19:25 schreef Christian Flothmann <
notifications@github.com>:

I think you're right. Though I'm not sure what exactly needs to be
changed. Does this block replace the call to render() in the loop?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#4629 (comment).

[xabbuh]

@stof Can you please confirm if we properly understand your suggestion?

[webda2l]

It's sure that it's not anymore the right way to do since a while... : SF2.1 - http://symfony.com/blog/form-goodness-in-symfony-2-1#collection-improvements)
But lots of people seems ignore it.

An example to render a collection with list UL :

{# tasks collection #}
{% block _tasks_widget %}
{% spaceless %}
    {% set attr = attr|merge({'data-prototype': form_row(prototype) }) %}
    <ul {{ block('widget_container_attributes') }}>
        {% for child in form %}
            {{ form_row(child) }}
        {% endfor %}
    </ul>
{% endspaceless %}
{% endblock %}

{# task child (_tasks_entry_row / _tasks_entry_label / _tasks_entry_widget available) #}
{% block _tasks_entry_row %}
{% spaceless %}
        <li>
            {{ form_row(form.task) }}
            {{ form_row(form.dueDate) }}
        </li>
{% endspaceless %}
{% endblock %}

The prototype attribute will be generated automatically in the right format with LI

[wouterj]

@xabbuh can you please update this PR with the change proposed by @stof? (see also the blogpost referenced by @webda2l)

Btw, can you please also handle #4797. It explains the same thing, but less verbose and in another location. Would be great if we can make both PRs ready to merge!

[wouterj]

@xabbuh can you please take care of this one and #4797?

[xabbuh]

Actually, I'm stuck how this should look like in the PHP template.

[xabbuh]

@wouterj Do we really need #4797 at all when this is merged? Imho everything should be fine then. The only thing I can image is to add a cross-reference to the other article. What do you think?

[wouterj]

@xabbuh it's up to you :) I think the location of #4797 is better and the form collections article should just reference.

[wouterj]

Closing in favor of #5643