[theme-reviewers] pluggable functions

[Philip M. Hofer (Frumph)]

/agree


From: Chip Bennett 
Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 12:51 PM
To: theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org 
Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] pluggable functions

And by contrast, making custom function return/output values filterable is as good or better, depending on the circumstances. Depending on the amount/complexity of that output/returned content, I would consider using custom filters to be better practice than using pluggable functions. 

Of course, that's why it is good to make *reocmmendations* in Theme reviews at this point, rather than making *requirements* or "not-approving" Themes, based on pluggable-vs-filterable functions.

Chip


On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 2:46 PM, Philip M. Hofer (Frumph) <philip at frumph.net> wrote:

  Most functions being pluggable, i.e. function_exists (if that’s what you’re referring to) is actually a good idea.

  This allows those functions to be re-written if necessary in the functions.php of the child theme.

  I would consider this best practice.



  From: Chip Bennett 
  Sent: Saturday, October 27, 2012 12:22 PM
  To: theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org 
  Subject: Re: [theme-reviewers] pluggable functions

  Absent pre-existing guidelines, I would list your findings as *recommended* only. It is always good to promote and to educate regarding best practices, but we should only ever *not-approve* (even if "required fix in next revision") those criteria that are stated in the guidelines. 

  (That said: feel free to propose guidelines revisions wrt pluggable vs. filterable functions!)

  Thanks,

  Chip


  On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Kirk Wight <kwight at kwight.ca> wrote:

    Howdy, 

    I'm reviewing a theme that has made all functions in functions.php pluggable, including those on hooks. From what I understand, this won't break anything, but doesn't feel very "best practice"-y (anything on a hook can just be removed from the hook, making the pluggable code un-necessary).

    The theme was already approved, but I prefer to encourage the best practice; perhaps a "fix in next release" note is appropriate, rather than blocking approval?..

    _______________________________________________
    theme-reviewers mailing list
    theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
    http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers




------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  _______________________________________________
  theme-reviewers mailing list
  theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
  http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers


  _______________________________________________
  theme-reviewers mailing list
  theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
  http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
theme-reviewers mailing list
theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20121027/e44e887e/attachment.htm>