[theme-reviewers] Question about child theming

[Chip Bennett]

Bear in mind: Child Themes are intended to make Theme modification
easier/more future-proof for *end users* first and foremost - via simple
CSS and template/markup overrides. They're quite useful for developers, but
developers aren't the primary target use case for Child Themes.

Developers have the option to make use of Pluggable functions, custom
action and filter hooks, or even forking a Theme. Requiring the original
Theme developer to implement Pluggable functions for any or all Theme
functions, merely to facilitate downstream developers, constrains
original-Theme developers far more than would be reasonable.


On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 8:31 PM, Josh Pollock <jpollock412 at gmail.com> wrote:

> @chip- That's a reasonable argument that I buy in the sense that not all
> functions should be pluggable. The fact that I can bust a parent theme with
> a messed up function override in the child theme is my problem as a
> developer though.
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 4:35 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>
>> That's a development decision. Not all functions are intended to be
>> Pluggable, and wholesale overriding of some functions would cause the Theme
>> to break entirely.
>>
>> Making functions Pluggable isn't recommended, much less best-practice.
>> (Notice that core is moving away from Pluggable functions as well.) It's
>> strictly the purview of the developer to determine whether functions should
>> be Pluggable or to have their output filterable.
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 3:43 PM, Josh Pollock <jpollock412 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Why don't we require that all functions be wrapped in if ( !
>>> function_exists( 'function_name') ) : wrappers? It seems to me like
>>> requiring this would make child themeing easier as a all functions from a
>>> parent theme could be easily over ridden from a child theme. Yes, I realize
>>> you can use remove_action and remove_filter but what about functions not
>>> hooked to filters or actions?
>>>
>>> I'm wondering if there is a reason for this or if my logic is flawed.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Josh
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20131222/e1f994e9/attachment.html>