Enhancement for template response

[janis91]

As discussed in #889 , I added the capability for passing required scripts and styles to the template response. The scripts and styles will be added to the template after that.

An example constructor call (scripts work the same):

$styles = array(
            'vendor' => array('select2/select2'),
            'app' => array('nextnotes' => array('font-awesome.min',
                'simplemde.min',
                'markdown.min',
                'style')
            )
        );
new TemplateResponse('nextnotes', 'main', array(), 'user', $styles);

I will provide the tests, if this is what you were expecting @rullzer.

[mention-bot]

@janis91, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the annotation information on this pull request, we identified @MorrisJobke, @BernhardPosselt and @DeepDiver1975 to be potential reviewers

[BernhardPosselt]

What would scripts look like?

[janis91]

full example:

$styles = [
    'vendor' => ['select2/select2'],
    'app' => [
        'nextnotes' => [
            'font-awesome.min',
            'simplemde.min',
            'markdown.min',
            'style',
        ],
    ],
];
$scripts = [
    'vendor' => ['select2/select2'],
    'app' => [
        'nextnotes' => [
            'notes',
            'tags',
            'view',
            'app',
        ],
    ],
];
new TemplateResponse('nextnotes', 'main', [], 'user', $styles, $scripts);

[BernhardPosselt]

Hm I'd say the idea is good but that's one giant constructor. Think of inlining everything ;D

What about combining both arrays in another array, so instead of $scripts, $styles, $htmlImports, ... we would simply pass something like $assets where $assets is:

[
    'scripts' => ...
    'styles' => ...
...

[rullzer]

Thanks for the PR @janis91

seeing it now. I'm not a big fan of magic arrays to pass to constructors.
I'm mayb leaning more to a few functions on the template response:

addVendorScript, addScript etc.

That might make it more explicit and a bit more abstract?
Mmmm need to do some more thinking about that.

[janis91]

I could remove it from the constructor and add functions for every case. But recently I recognized the style and script functions in /lib/private/legacy/template/functions.php. Maybe we have to discuss if the approach proposed here is really a step forward?

[raghunayyar]

Hi, can you add labels to this PR to have a better clarity if it is a WIP or a complete PR?
Thanks.

[MorrisJobke]

@rullzer Anything new?

[MorrisJobke]

This then needs to be removed.

[rullzer]

Mmmm I'm still not really sure here.
@janis91 maybe we should indeed for now stick with the stuff that is there. And revisit this when we get a decent template engine. Does that sound good?

[janis91]

Yeah I am with you!

[BernhardPosselt]

FYI I found this idea to be a quite interesting take on templates https://r.je/transphporm-php-templates.html

Not saying that we should adopt it but its interesting

[rullzer]

Ok lets close this then.

Thnaks for the link @BernhardPosselt