[Solar-talk] Re: [Solar-svn] Revision 3037 (a.k.a page black-list)

[Antti Holvikari]

On Sat, Mar 22, 2008 at 8:52 PM, Paul M Jones <pmjones at paul-m-jones.com> wrote:
> Hi Antti -- must step out, but quick replies first:
>
>
>  > Ok, so I think we still have a problem. Actually two:
>  >
>  > 1. The black-list is for class names which means that Vendor_App_Base
>  > is different than Solar_App_Base. **Every** vendor that has a base app
>  > class needs to add that to the list **in addition** to Solar_App_Base.
>  > I suggest that the list is for page names. This way `base` covers 99%
>  > of the cases.
>
>  Fair enough and good call, will change this later tonight or maybe
>  tomorrow.
>
>
>
>  > 2. I'd very much prefer to have the error handling in a page
>  > controller than in the front itself. The front now just runs
>  > _notFound() which prints this simple 404 page. Instead, let the front
>  > run my default page controller and I'll then see what I can do with
>  > the request. This will most likely run _notFound() in the **page**
>  > controller, which actually makes perfect sense.
>
>  As it is now, the front-controller *should* send all unrecognized
>  requests to the default controller.  The only time _notFound() is
>  invoked is if the default controller can't be found.  Is it not
>  behaving this way?  I may have messed up the logic moving things around.

Ah, I see it now. My Vendor_App_Base is being chosen by
_getPageClass(), this is why it never uses _default ($class is
`true`).

So, I think the solution is to check the blacklist in _getPageClass().

-- 
Antti Holvikari <http://anttih.com>