[theme-reviewers] Question about ob_start and ob_get_clean (Vicky Arulsingam)

Wed Jun 29 21:43:54 UTC 2011

4 lines of code, in 1 Plugin, distributed to thousands of users

vs

4 lines of code, in thousands of Themes, to fix one Plugin

Besides: WordPress *already* provides the "basic functionality for advanced
users to take advantage of".

Chip

On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Gmail <darrenslatten at gmail.com> wrote:

> Adding output buffering and a custom filter to wp_head and wp_footer
> requires...what, 4 extra lines of code? I'm having a very difficult time
> understanding why "contact the plugin author and ask them to change their
> code" would be the best approach.
>
> Also, I'm not suggesting a hard-coded fix for specific plugins--I'm only
> suggesting that a theme provides that basic functionality for advanced users
> to take advantage of. This would require adding custom code to
> functions.php.
>
> So...4 lines of code to give advanced users control of plugin output...or
> contact every plugin author and ask them to update their code?
>
> -Darren Slatten
>
> On Jun 29, 2011, at 4:18 PM, Simon Prosser <pross at pross.org.uk> wrote:
>
> > Surely the contact form should ONLY be loading it js and css in pages
> > and posts that have comments enabled, if not, thats poor coding for
> > the plugin, and rather than coding a theme around the plugin, you
> > should perhaps be hassling the author to change said plugin to use
> > some logic in wp_head.
> >
> > On 29 June 2011 22:13, Gmail <darrenslatten at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> So...a better approach would be what? Rewrite all plugins that don't
> follow
> >> best practices?
> >> That still wouldn't address issues like client-side load order (e.g. to
> >> optimize page load times).
> >> A real example where wp_head filtering is useful is in conjunction with
> the
> >> Contact Form 7 plugin. By default, enabling that plugin would insert a
> CSS
> >> file and script into the head of every page. With a custom filter and a
> >> conditional statement, I can make sure only the contact form page loads
> >> those resources.
> >> In many cases, this can also be achieved "more elegantly" by removing
> hooked
> >> functions, but filtering the output buffer (i.e., working with regex) is
> >> much faster/easier than digging through plugins, searching for the
> custom
> >> function code that hooked into wp_head.
> >> -Darren Slatten
> >> On Jun 29, 2011, at 1:44 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> I think you have that approach exactly backwards. Plugins should be
> looking
> >> after themselves, by hooking properly into appropriate hooks. Theme and
> >> Plugins should mostly stay out of one another's way.
> >> If Theme and Plugins all enqueue jQuery properly, then there will
> *never* be
> >> duplicate jQuery scripts enqueued.
> >> Chip
> >> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 11:45 AM, Gmail <darrenslatten at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I use output buffering on wp_head() and wp_footer(), in order to give
> my
> >>> theme complete control over them. Since most plugins hook onto these,
> they
> >>> can become cluttered with scripts and CSS file links. By using OB and a
> >>> custom filter, I can do things like (1) remove duplicate jQuery
> scripts, and
> >>> (2) optimize the order that CSS and scripts are loaded in. Essentially
> this
> >>> gives my theme the final say in what resources are loaded into the
> page,
> >>> allowing me to "clean up after" plugins.
> >>>
> >>> -Darren Slatten
> >>>
> >>> On Jun 29, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Vicky Arulsingam
> >>> <vicky.arulsingam at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I've asked the theme author to explain the usage. If there's a valid
> >>>> use for it then it should be allowed but I haven't a clue how.
> >>>>
> >>>> On 6/29/11, Ryan Hellyer <ryan at pixopoint.com> wrote:
> >>>>> There are many reasons to use output buffering (ob_start etc), but
> >>>>> they would rarely be used within a theme. I've seen themes which use
> >>>>> buffering as a way to dynamically minify the markup, but that's a
> >>>>> horrid way to do it - much better incorporated within a caching
> plugin
> >>>>> IMO.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There may be a practical use for output buffer in a theme, but I'm
> >>>>> darned if I can think of a good example. I wouldn't want to see it
> >>>>> banned outright, as someone may come up with a cunning use for it
> that
> >>>>> none of us have thought of.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Perhaps the theme check plugin could check for output buffering
> >>>>> functions and leave a request for the theme developer to provide a
> >>>>> reason for using it? That way they'll know it's non-standard and
> >>>>> provide a reason (good or bad) for the theme reviewers to read. Could
> >>>>> potentially save a little to and fro'ing in the future. Just an idea.
> >>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
> >>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> >>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> -----
> >>>> Vicky Arulsingam
> >>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>> 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
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > My Blog: http://www.pross.org.uk/
> > Plugins : http://www.pross.org.uk/plugins/
> > Themes: http://wordpress.org/extend/themes/profile/pross
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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/20110629/0e4b800f/attachment.htm>