[Solar-talk] Helper stack

[Rodrigo Moraes]

Hi,
A question about the helper stack. I'm wondering about the necessity
of Vendor_Helper and Vendor_View_Helper directories. Following
Solar_View_Helper, shouldn't Vendor_Helper be dropped for consistency
to avoid confusion? I'm confused because of the results I get.
Solar_Controller_Page says:

        // add the helper classes to the view object.
        // the order of searching will be:
        // Vendor_App_Example_Helper_*, Vendor_App_Helper_*,
        // Vendor_View_Helper_*, Solar_View_Helper_*

But my helper stack is:
    'stack' =>
    array (
      0 => 'Tipos_App_Blog_Helper_',
      1 => 'Tipos_Helper_',
      2 => 'Tipos_View_Helper_',
      3 => 'Solar_View_Helper_',
    ),

I think this would be more straightforward in
Controller_Page::_getLayout(), avoiding some strrpos() and substr():

        // get directories list
        $dirs = explode('_', $class);

        // stack of helper classes
        $helper = array();

        // stack for directories
        $stack = '';

        // find all parent-level helpers
        foreach($dirs as $dir) {
            $stack .= $dir . '_';
            $helper[] = $stack . 'Helper';
        }

        $helper = array_reverse($helper);

        // add the helper class names to the view object
        $layout->addHelperClass($helper);

It works as declared in the phpdoc, except because it doesn't include
Vendor_View_Helper, but if really needed just add a bit to the
foreach:

        foreach($dirs as $key => $dir) {
            $stack .= $dir . '_';

             // find the vendor-level helpers (Vendor_View_Helper)
            if($key == 0 && $dir != 'Solar') {
                 $directory = $stack . 'View_';
            } else {
                 $directory = $stack;
            }

            $helper[] = $directory . 'Helper';
        }

I wouldn't mind to not have Vendor_View_Helper, though.

The only problem I see is if someone uses a class
Vendor_App_Very_Long_Name_Oh_One_More, and although I can't think in a
reason for this, a foreach in eight or twenty values still wouldn't
hurt. Perhaps there are other problems I've missed.

regards,
rodrigo moraes / brazil