[theme-reviewers] pluggable functions

[Chip Bennett]

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 <chip at chipbennett.net>
> *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
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20121027/9da2a57b/attachment.htm>