hook_priority

welcome,

Good to see your project page and readme are very detailed, but please use html-tags on your project page because it look a little unstructured at the moment and is hard to read.

• There are no inline-comments which document what that line of code is doing - even if here's not much code to comment on, it's always good to be able to understand what each block of code is good for without the need of actually reading it. Maybe you could add some comments into _module_implements_alter().
• .install, make sure to end all comments with . ! or ?
• please do not use variable names as $i, $v, $k. rather use self-explaining names (See best practice)

Beside this, your module looks pretty good so far.

We do really need more hands in the application queue and highly recommend to get a review bonus so we can come back to your application sooner.

regards

Good work. Nice to see the comments.

Hello,

Automatic Review:

Using the pareview app found this:

FILE: ...iew/sites/all/modules/pareview_temp/test_candidate/hook_priority.module
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FOUND 1 ERROR(S) AFFECTING 1 LINE(S)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
80 | ERROR | Function comment short description must be on a single line
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Manual Review:

• The code and idea seem straight forward to me, but I'm not sure if there are similar systems elsewhere.
• I would update the project description in your .info file to something closer to your project page description.

The PAReview returned no errors.
Just a couple small things:
1. In hook_priority.module file you have mistyped implemented hook name (line 112);
2. In info file description you could use the first sentence of introduction from readme file.

Other than that found no functional problems with your module.

Good luck!

Hi there,

I was just looking for project applications to review and I came across this one. I see it's been sitting here for two months with no activity, and, reading through the code and documentation, I'm thinking the reason that nobody has stepped up to touch this is because of one basic problem with the module that is not easy to address constructively:

If I understand correctly, the premise of this module is essentially that hook_module_implements_alter is too difficult for developers to use, and provides a few convenience functions to wrap around it. The problem is that, from the perspective of the average Drupal developer, this module doesn't appear to be easier to use than hook_module_implements_alter and also seems like it might be a risky module to install.

Here's my reasoning:

Why this module isn't obviously easier than hook_module_implements_alter

• After reading the documentation, it's still not clear where these functions should be used in a module. Where should hook_priority_set() be called from? From an install file? From within a particular hook? It's just not obvious how these functions should fit into Drupal's hook-oriented architecture.
• The module name in itself is confusing. Anybody who has gotten used to seeing function names starting with hook_ will expect that these functions indicate hooks to be implemented by another module. So it seems weird to be calling functions in my module that are named this way.

Why this module seems risky to install

• This module seems to be fairly invasive. This chunk of code looks like it sets the weight of all hook implementations to 0:
  

    foreach ($module_list as $module => $group) {
      $weight = isset($hooks_priority_list[$module . '_' . $hook])
        ? $hooks_priority_list[$module . '_' . $hook]
        : HOOK_PRIORITY_DEFAULT_WEIGHT;
  
      $hooks_ordered[$weight][$module] = $group;
    }
  

  If I just want to change the relative order of one hook, do I really want this module to change the weight of all hooks in my Drupal installation?

• It seems like the module ought to use some sort of caching. Again, maybe I'm not understanding how this works correctly, but it seems that the module only relies on drupal_static to store modifications registered by hook_priority_set:

  function hook_priority_module_implements_alter(&$module_list, $hook) {
  
    // Get the stack where we are inserted custom rules.
    $hooks_priority_list = &drupal_static('hooks_priority_list', array());
  
  

  Since drupal_static only stores data for the duration of a single page request, this means that in order to get any data here, hook_priority_set needs to be run during the same request as hook_priority_module_implements_alter, which is run when? When caches are cleared? Again, maybe this is just a documentation issue, and you just need to explain where your functions should go so that hook_priority_module_implements_alter sees them.

So, again, I'm not an authority here, but I'm guessing that in order to get full project status, this module needs to do more to convince developers that it is a good alternative to just using Drupal's native hooks. Maybe you just need to explain more clearly in your project page and documentation what the use case for this module is and what specific problem it solves.

Closing due to lack of activity. Feel free to reopen if you are still working on this application.

Multiple Applications

It appears that there have been multiple project applications opened under your username:

Project 1: http://drupal.org/node/1587176
Project 2: http://drupal.org/node/1772350
Project 3: http://drupal.org/node/1453964
Project 4: http://drupal.org/node/1406352
Project 5: http://drupal.org/node/1438600
Project 6: http://drupal.org/node/1929114

As successful completion of the project application process results in the applicant being granted the 'Create Full Projects' permission, there is no need to take multiple applications through the process. Once the first application has been successfully approved, then the applicant can promote other projects without review. Because of this, posting multiple applications is not necessary, and results in additional workload for reviewers ... which in turn results in longer wait times for everyone in the queue. With this in mind, your secondary applications have been marked as 'closed(duplicate)', with only one application left open (chosen at random).

If you prefer that we proceed through this review process with a different application than the one which was left open, then feel free to close the 'open' application as a duplicate, and re-open one of the project applications which had been closed.

Styling