• Welcome to Simple Machines Community Forum. Please login or sign up.
October 21, 2021, 03:36:19 PM

News:

SMF 2.0.18 has been released! Please update. Read more.


[TIP] Lazy Admin Menu

Started by ѕησω, September 15, 2010, 08:00:30 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Hj Ahmad Rasyid Hj Ismail

I just realize that this mod and the packaged mod is different in the sense that the packaged mod is listing the admin menu automatically while this mod is listing the admin menu manually. I am not sure which one is the best though but automatically should cover new menu added by mods as well, right?

Arantor

The mod does it better in pretty much every respect since it automatically covers other mods.
No good deed goes unpunished
All helpful urges should be circumvented

Hj Ahmad Rasyid Hj Ismail

What about the loading issue? Does that only applies to manual mod or the packaged mod as well?

Quote from: ‽ on July 21, 2014, 01:41:20 PM
Not a fan of loading potentially many extra files every page load for admins.

Arantor

The mod handles that by adding caching, which is A Good Thing.
No good deed goes unpunished
All helpful urges should be circumvented

Hj Ahmad Rasyid Hj Ismail

The Better Profile mod doesn't list menu automatically but manually. No caching is added as I can see. Will this cause any loading issue if compared to Lazy Admin Menu mod? (Both were originally based on this mod idea but later extended as I understand).

Arantor

No, because in the Better Profile Mod's case it doesn't dynamically load anything which is where the performance headache is. If you have a static list the cost is negligible. But the minute it's loaded on demand, you escalate the cost to cover loading all the files in question - don't forget that Admin.php (where the Admin menu is stored) is so much more than just the admin menu.

Same with profile but trying to splice the profile menu is... a joy I wouldn't even begin to recommend to anyone.

One thing I will say that is quietly annoying me about this... instead of putting in effort backporting 2.1 stuff to 2.0, I'd honestly prefer to see the time and energy being spent on getting 2.1 ready.
No good deed goes unpunished
All helpful urges should be circumvented

Hj Ahmad Rasyid Hj Ismail

Thank you for the explanation.

Agreed on the last paragraph as well.

dougiefresh

Quote from: ‽ on August 04, 2014, 06:05:26 AM
One thing I will say that is quietly annoying me about this... instead of putting in effort backporting 2.1 stuff to 2.0, I'd honestly prefer to see the time and energy being spent on getting 2.1 ready.
Like you've pointed out, it's the "joy" of modding.  Mod authors can focus on what they want to focus on.....  Although I admit, I don't understand how to "search" for issues within 2.1 to test....  And yes, I've read the How can I help? topic in the 2.1 section....

Arantor

I do understand, but at the same time it seems like energy that might better be served elsewhere. My refusal to contribute seriously to 2.1 any longer is not technical but mostly political.

As far as testing, everything needs testing. Every facet of every function needs testing. There are entire functions that have never been tested, not even by their authors. It also needs usability testing by people who, well, aren't the core team to see where there are stupid things that can be changed to improve usability.

Testing at the code level is borderline impossible, despite every attempt I made to clean up unnecessary options and reduce path complexity.
No good deed goes unpunished
All helpful urges should be circumvented

dougiefresh

Okay, okay.... Lemme finish up the last two mods that I had submitted like a year ago and never got around to fixing properly so that they would get approved....  (As well as the bug reports  :o )  and I'll look at 2.1 further...

Advertisement: